effects of globalization in the philippines essay brainly

Essay on Effects Of Globalization In The Philippines

Students are often asked to write an essay on Effects Of Globalization In The Philippines in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Effects Of Globalization In The Philippines

Economic growth.

Globalization has helped the Philippines grow its economy. Many foreign companies have set up there, creating jobs for local people. This means more money for workers and their families. The country has become better at making and selling things to other countries.

Cultural Exchange

Filipinos now enjoy a mix of cultures from around the world. They watch international movies, eat different foods, and celebrate new holidays. Yet, some worry that this might make people forget the unique Filipino traditions.

Improved Technology

The Philippines has seen better technology due to globalization. Internet and smartphones are common, and many people can now connect with others across the globe. This helps with education and business.

Environmental Concerns

Globalization has led to more factories and cars in the Philippines, which can harm the environment. The air gets polluted, and natural places can get damaged. It’s important to find ways to grow but also protect nature.

250 Words Essay on Effects Of Globalization In The Philippines

Introduction to globalization in the philippines, jobs and the economy.

One big effect of globalization is on jobs. Many companies from other countries have set up in the Philippines. This has created more work for people, especially in factories and call centers. These jobs often pay more than local jobs, which is good for the workers. But sometimes, these jobs can also be hard and not always secure.

Technology and Culture

The Philippines has seen a lot of new technology and ideas from other places because of globalization. People can now use the internet and mobile phones to connect with the world. This means they can learn new things and share their own culture with others. But it also means that foreign cultures can influence the local way of life, which can change old traditions.

Environment and Health

Globalization has also brought challenges to the environment and health in the Philippines. More factories can mean more pollution, which is bad for nature and people’s health. Also, diseases can spread faster when people travel more between countries.

In conclusion, globalization has many sides in the Philippines. It has brought more jobs and new technology but also challenges like losing some traditions, pollution, and health issues. It is important for the Philippines to manage these effects carefully to make sure that the good outweighs the bad.

500 Words Essay on Effects Of Globalization In The Philippines

What is globalization.

Globalization means the way countries and people of the world interact and integrate. This happens through trade, technology, and the movement of people. In simple words, it’s like everyone from different places sharing things, ideas, and ways of life.

Globalization in the Philippines

One big effect of globalization in the Philippines is on jobs. Many companies from other countries have set up in the Philippines. This has created jobs for Filipinos. People work in factories, call centers, and other services that serve not just Filipinos but also customers from all over the world.

The economy of the Philippines has grown because it sells goods and services to other countries. This means that the country makes more money, and this can help improve the lives of many people. But it’s also true that not everyone benefits the same way. Some people get very good jobs, while others still have a hard time finding work.

Technology and Communication

Culture and lifestyle.

Filipino culture has been influenced by many other cultures because of globalization. You can see this in the food, music, and movies that are popular in the Philippines. Many people enjoy things from other parts of the world, like fast food from America or pop music from Korea.

But some people worry that this can make local traditions less important. They want to make sure that Filipinos remember and keep their own culture alive too.

Environment

Working abroad.

Many Filipinos work in other countries. This is partly because of globalization. They send money back home to their families. This money is very important for the Philippines’ economy. But it can be hard for families when parents or children are far away for a long time.

Globalization has changed the Philippines in many ways. There are good things like more jobs, better technology, and new ideas. But there are also challenges like protecting the culture and environment. It’s important for the Philippines to find ways to enjoy the benefits of being connected to the world while also taking care of its own unique country and people.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines

This essay will focus on the effects of globalization in the Philippines, examining its impact on the economy, culture, and social dynamics, and how the country has adapted to and been shaped by global influences. At PapersOwl, you’ll also come across free essay samples that pertain to Agriculture.

How it works

Globalization is associated with not only advancements in communication and ever-expanding trade routes but also transformation in political systems and the enhancement or destruction of cultural heritage (Block, 2004; Lieber & Weisberg, 2002). Indeed, it is apparent that globalization in developing countries has a significant impact on political, economic, and cultural aspects. Globalization arises from several factors which may include colonialism (Korobeynikova, 2016). The expansion in power and territory that is characteristic of colonialism may promote communication and technological advancements, leading to globalization. A prominent example of a nation undergoing significant changes as a result of globalization in the Philippines.

Historical records show that the Philippines has been colonized by Western nations as well as its northern neighbors, China and Malaysia. The Philippines has experienced significant cultural and economic changes arising as a result of globalization from the 1980s up till the present ( Guinigundo, 2018 ). While globalization leads to positive changes in political systems and a shift from an agrarian to an industrial economy, negative impacts such as financial imbalance between the rich and the poor and environmental damage are ever-present.

• 1 Political Institutions and Industrialization
• 2 Financial Aid
• 4.1 References

Political Institutions and Industrialization

In a historical context where power has exchanged several hands, the Philippines has, over many years, transformed its political systems. However, it may be asserted that the political governance of the Philippines needs significant improvement in terms of administrative aspects. Moreover, another factor that disrupts political governance in the Philippines is corruption. Indeed, several developing countries experience disruptions in governance arising from corruption when no stable government is established in place (Naher et al., 2020). The current state of the government of the Philippines profoundly affects trade, finance, and the environment.

Since joining the World Trade Organization better known as the ‘WTO’ in 1995, the Philippines has experienced a shift in its economy from an agrarian economy transitioning towards industry and export (Bajpai, 2021). This is due in part to new trade agreements and an increase of open markets after the Marcos Administration. In addition, the Philippines receives foreign aid since it is regarded as a developing country. A major way this aid makes its way into the country is through foreign direct investments with its main partner, the US. This aid has been used to fund developmental projects such as infrastructure, roads, and buildings (USAID, 2021).

In an attempt to compete with its Asian competitors, over the last decade, the Philippines has been making a commendable effort to promote industrialization (de Dios & Williamson, 2015). With astounding pressure to industrialize, the land traditionally allotted for agriculture is starting to be used for industrialization over all the nation. However, while the economy and culture are rapidly transforming for the better, the environment is taking a toll (Magdalena, 2016).

Globalization has been a significant contributive factor in the way the Philippines has been shaped over the last decade and although industrialization has had positive impacts in terms of stimulating the economy, certain negative effects are also observable throughout the island.

In most third-world and developing countries, the postcolonial period witnessed a rise in state-centric approaches to governance. This was primarily due to an absence of private capital and a lack of an advanced market. “More importantly, the scope and role of the state expanded considerably as a result of the government’s nation-building developmental agenda in these countries irrespective of their ideological identities based on capitalist or socialist inclinations” (Haque, 2002). From the late 1990s onwards to the present, the government of the Philippines has been upgraded to a sophisticated system rivaling that of the US. The Philippines has a three-part judiciary system in which there is a legislative, executive, and judicial branch with the president being the head of state and government. This benefits the average Filipino because they can vote and effectively voice their opinions. However, like most developing countries, corruption in the Philippines has created distrust between the government and its people. Furthermore, the government has set three main functional aims namely, minimal, intermediate, and activist. The government aims to employ these concepts when structuring its economy (Patalinghug, 2003). Considering the long list of responsibilities that their government has taken on, Patalinghug (2003) critiques, “that although the government has moved on from basic services to things such as the regulation of markets, it has yet to provide programs that alleviate the conditions of the economically poor.” He notes that despite the many capabilities of their government thus far, those economically poor were not accounted for.

Only those in high positions of power such as governmental officials, military personnel, figureheads, and high-income benefit and are protected within the present system of government. Unfortunately, the poor in the country continues to witness their financial conditions worsen while the government develops industrialized areas of the Philippines such as Manila and Cavite, in an attempt to promote industrialization. Much of the Philippine islands are provinces that are neglected due to a lack of administrative efficiency. The poor such as those coming from these provinces are neglected since they do not receive the same educational opportunities as compared to the rich from industrialized areas. Indeed, people from provinces were reported to often halt all educational inclinations and opportunities at the age of 16 to engage in agricultural practices. Patalinghug (2003) states, “These inadequacies seem to indicate that the Philippines is a state with weak capability due to its inability to adequately provide functions that are characteristics of a state with minimal capacity.” 

In response to his analysis, it is argued that overall globalization initiated by the Filipino government has had a tremendous negative impact, which outshines productive industrial efforts. Their government is yet to establish programs and initiatives in place to help the poor and regulate funding for projects in the provinces. Specifically, during the Marcos Administration in the years of 1980 to 1985, financial openness and accountability were at an all-time low because of the existence of rigid monopolies in the market which reduced investment and led to extensive borrowing (Deluna & Chelly, 2014). This exemplifies how the instability of the government in the past has severely harmed the Filipino economy in the present.

Financial Aid

The Philippines has been upfront about receiving foreign aid, with the US being one of its biggest benefactors. In the year 2010 alone, trade between the US and the Philippines was estimated to be roughly as much as $15.4 billion (Deluna & Chelly, 2014). The amount of aid received is a direct result of the increasing external debt that the Philippines has accumulated over the past years. In addition to the increasing debt, the GDP of the country has continued to decline. The government of the Philippines and its beneficiaries have mutually agreed to utilize the financial aid to enhance rice production, inland fish farming, and industrial crops. In recent years, a significant proportion of this aid has been used to improve rice technology such as purchasing machinery used for harvesting and water irrigation systems. Experimenting with rice production in the Philippines is beneficial for its Asian neighbors, countries such as Brunei since the Philippines offers its neighbors its own form of aid by sharing knowledge of agricultural techniques (Jennings, 2018). Moreover, in 2014, in light of Papua New Guinea’s depleting economy, a large number of Filipinos migrated to the region to compensate for the labor shortage. In turn, the supply of Filipino workers was reimbursed by Papua New Guinea in the form of remittances sent back to the Philippines. Therefore, although the Philippines could not offer financial aid, it demonstrated its worth in terms of offering aid in the form of an invaluable labor force.

Moreover, the People’s Republic of China is considered an important investor and provider of aid to the Philippines. According to recent collaborative agreements, China has awarded the Philippines $169 billion in aid to be invested towards the building of railways and infrastructure by 2022 (Jennings, 2018). This holds the promise of substantially improving the economy since more powerful and influential countries such as China are beginning to invest in the Philippines. This demonstrates that there is a strong belief in regaining spend revenue. It is asserted that the financial aid provided to the Philippines by several countries is very positive since it has the strong potential of stimulating the economy of the Philippines. In particular, people living in industrialized regions are reasoned to significantly improve their living conditions because of newly created employment opportunities arising from the development of new industries. Such constructive endeavors motivate people to engage in employment opportunities that would both benefit the country and themselves as opposed to working on private projects from home. However, employment opportunities created as a result of the construction of new industries may not benefit individuals who are not able to travel abroad to conduct business propositions with international clients as well as those who do not possess skills used in the industrialized age. Nevertheless, it is reasoned that the overall benefits of receiving financial aid may gradually become thoroughly observable in terms of improved economic conditions and long-term stability.

In the past decade, the Philippines has also profoundly revolutionized its trade market. By signing the Articles of Agreement (AOA) of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), the Philippines has demonstrated its commitment towards the increased import of goods. Although the import of goods is generally considered to be a positive and collaborative endeavor, it also means that the Philippines is increasingly reliant on goods production by other countries such as China, Malaysia, and Indonesia as its top trading partners. In the 1980s, the Philippines strongly supported trade openness in order to boost foreign markets and free trade agreements. The desired outcome was to obtain funds while creating potential opportunities to invest (Deluna & Chelly, 2014). While the trade market is flourishing, it has had a negative impact on the labor force. Orbeta (2013) has extensively discussed the concept of “de-industrialization” in his paper titled “Enhancing labour mobility in ASEAN: Focus on lower-skilled workers”. Orbeta (2013) asserts that while the trade market is observably flourishing, “the cheap imports from low wage economies flood highly developed economic markets”. In other words, people in the Philippines who are engaged in low-skill labor suffer from excessive imports.

Globalization in trade has had both positive and negative implications for the economy of the Philippines. Trade openness has created security, alliance, and collaboration with powerful and influential counties around the globe. This collaboration has also secured the influx of foreign aid into the Philippines towards the development of infrastructural projects. However, the majority of the Philippines’ local workforce is negatively affected by industrialization since trade openness has resulted in unemployment and job displacement for low-skilled workers. Important cultural knowledge of farming and sustainable living is threatened to be lost forever.

After an evaluation of the Philippines’ engagement in the trade market, it is concluded that the overall effects of trade openness have been detrimental to the Philippines’ economy. It is true that trade openness significantly benefits those who work in multinational corporations (MNCs), possess high skill jobs, and reside in more industrialized parts of the islands, these people represent only a small population of the Philippines. A much larger population constitutes those with low-skill jobs such as workers of the agrarian sector. Not only is land allotted for rice fields and other agricultural resources diminishing at an accelerated rate, culture and tools of trade are also being lost. Even these workers with a low skill set still possess the invaluable knowledge of sustaining their natural resources. When knowledge such as time of harvest and agricultural techniques associated with increased efficiency is lost, it creates a debilitating dependency on other countries for goods that would otherwise be locally produced.

Environment

The Philippine islands comprise a rich collection of tropical forests and islands abundant in exotic fruit and rice fields. However, over the last few years, efforts to promote industrialization to push the Philippines into the 21 st century have resulted in the agricultural economy and environment taking a severe toll. The signing of the AOA resulted in an observable reduction of agricultural subsidies to the north which would improve market access to countries that export agricultural products ( Aquino et al., 2013). In theory, the AOA agreement would have benefited the economy of the Philippines. However, it has a negative impact on the agricultural sector since developing countries like the Philippines have little or no domestic product to export due to industrialization. The conversion of agricultural land to exporting zones, industrial centers, and real estate has resulted in a rapid loss of agricultural resources and topsoil. Industrialization has also caused desertification and soil erosion in several regions. In fact, five million hectares of land that was once used for rice farming have now been reduced to 1.9 million hectares.

With arable land gradually becoming more and more scarce, the government has set initiatives in place to promote the import of goods that could have been produced locally. This has resulted in a profound increase in unemployment ( Aquino et al., 2013). The reduction in land area for traditional agricultural resources has led to the Philippine farming sector shifting its production from resources such as rice and corn to more appealable goods such as mangoes, cassava, asparagus, etc. that can be sold in the market. However, this has come with significant consequences. More farmers in the provinces and commercialized farming sectors have begun using pesticides and fertilizers with chemical formulations unknown to locals. Although using such products produces better and high-quality goods, it also greatly endangers the health of workers who come into contact with these goods. Indeed, Aquino et al. (2013) reports that in areas of Mindanao, ambulances are on kept on standby when pesticides are sprayed due to the imminent and debilitating harm that pesticides pose to human health.

For example, the pesticide called MOCAP commonly used in banana production is MOCAP is reported to be harmful to the land since it causes soil erosion and desertification. This also indicates that the use of such a harsh chemical to be used on products that are to be consumed and distributed is not appropriate (Pérez et al., 2015). Therefore, it may be said that while intentions of the AOA and the government of the Philippines may not have been blatantly destructive, certain initiatives such as changes in land use and the use of harsh pesticides have ultimately been harmful to the health and wellbeing of Filipinos. Since the Philippines’ economy and its revenue stems from agriculture, it was perhaps not the most feasible or lucrative endeavor to commercialize large hectares of land in a short period of time. The commercialization and industrialization of farmland negatively affect farmers and those with low skill sets in the agricultural sector. It also creates an economy heavily reliant on imports to sustain itself since goods can no longer be produced locally, resulting in excessive debt and poverty. Therefore, the negative impact of globalization on the poverty and wellbeing of Filipinos far outweighs the benefits in terms of industrialization.

Nevertheless, globalization does offer the promise of the Philippines developing into a thriving economy. Development of new ties, trade relations, employment opportunities, and promoting opportunities to allow low-skilled workers to learn new and more useful skills is key to overcoming the negative consequences of globalization. While globalization has drastically affected the culture of the Philippines as well as its people, it has also paved the way for the development of new opportunities for the growth of the individual and state. It is reasoned that in terms of the development of a lucrative and successful economy, the government of the Philippines still needs to improve governance and ensure that political systems in place are strong and in accordance with the goals of the public. The next thirty years are crucial and it is argued that with appropriate governance, aid, and support, the Philippines will successfully compete with its neighboring countries. Indeed, overcoming adversities through will and constructive initiatives may be the key to the development of a successful and strong nation.

In conclusion, the Philippines has witnessed considerable changes in its economy and culture as a result of globalization. The government is engaged in navigating and assessing the impact of the programs and initiatives that have been put in place to determine if they are feasible for its citizens. Reports regarding public opinion about the government suggest that people are generally dissatisfied with the lack of active programs and initiatives in place to alleviate poverty. Indeed, trade openness has resulted in increased unemployment arising from the shift from an agrarian towards the industrial sector. Although the commercialization of agriculture has some benefits in terms of allowing the Philippines to compete with its Asian neighbors, trade openness has created a debilitating reliance on imported goods. However, there are also some positive effects of globalization. Trade openness has prompted alliance and collaboration with powerful and influential global nations which has also demonstrated their interest in the promising potential of the economy of the Philippines. The Philippines can offer is cheap yet labor, land open to commercialization, and some exports. Nevertheless, the health and well-being of Filipinos, especially those who work in commercial sectors, is at risk from the use of harsh pesticides which also soil erosion, desertification, and a further decrease in exports.

Aquino, A. P., Lim. V. A. A., & Ani , P. A. B. (2013). Republic Act 7607: Empowering smallhold farmers in their economic endeavors. FFTC Agricultural Policy Platform

Bajpai, P. (2021). Emerging Markets: Analyzing the Philippines’s GDP. Retrived from https://www.investopedia.com/articles/investing/091815/emerging-markets-analyzing-philippines-gdp.asp#:~:text=The%20Philippines%20has%20gradually%20shifted,industrial%20and%20service%2Doriented%20economy.&text=The%20low%20level%20of%20productivity,of%20poverty%20within%20the%20sector

Block, D. (2004). Globalization, transnational communication and the internet. International Journal on Multicultural Societies (IJMS).

Deluna, R., & Chelly, A. (2014). Economic Growth, Financial and Trade Globalization in the Philippines: A Vector Autoregressive Analysis . https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:pra:mprapa:60206

de Dios, E. S., & Williamson, J. G. (2015). Chapter 21 – Deviant Behavior: A Century of Philippine Industrialization. In A. M. Balisacan, U. Chakravorty, & M.-L. V. Ravago (Eds.), Sustainable Economic Development (pp. 371-400). Academic Press. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-800347-3.00021-2 

Guinigundo, D. C. (2018). The Globalisation Experience and Its Challenges for the Philippine Economy. BIS Paper No. 100q, Available at SSRN:  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3332089

Haque, M. S. (2002). Globalization, New Political Economy, and Governance: A Third World Viewpoint. Administrative Theory & Praxis , 24 (1), 103-124. https://doi.org/10.1080/10841806.2002.11029352 

Jennings, R. (2018). The Philippines, usually a receiver of foreign aid, offers some. Received from https://www.voanews.com/a/philippines-foreign-aid-papua-new-guinea/4399517.html

Korobeynikova, L. (2016). Globalization in the post – colonial world. SHS Web of Conferences , 28 , 01058. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/20162801058 

Lieber, R. J., & Weisberg, R. E. (2002). Globalization, Culture, and Identities in Crisis. International Journal of Politics, Culture, and Society , 16 (2), 273-296. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1020581114701 

Magdalena, F.V. (2016). Globalization and environmental decay: Mindanao during the 20th century. Progressio Journal on Human Development, 10 (1). Retrieved from http://ejournals.ph/form/cite.php?id=12941

Naher, N., Hoque, R., Hassan, M. S., Balabanova, D., Adams, A. M., & Ahmed, S. M. (2020). The influence of corruption and governance in the delivery of frontline health care services in the public sector: a scoping review of current and future prospects in low and middle-income countries of south and south-east Asia.  BMC Public Health ,  20 (1), 880. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08975-0

Orbeta, A. C. (2013). Enhancing labour mobility in ASEAN: Focus on lower-skilled workers. Philippine Institute of Development Studies Discussion Paper Series No. 2013-17 .

Patalinghug, E.E. (2003). Globalization and State Capacity: The Philippines . Philippine Institute for Development Studies . Discussion Paper Series No. 2003-20

Pérez, I. C., Gooc, C. M., Cabili, J. R., Rico, M. J. I., Ebasan, M. S., Zaragoza, M. J. G., Redondo, A. F. S., Orbita, R. R., & Lacuna, M. L. D. G. (2015). Pesticide use among farmers in Mindanao, Southern Philippines. AES Bioflux , 7 , 90-108. 

USAID. (2021). United States COVID-19 Assistance to the Philippines. Retrieved from https://www.usaid.gov/philippines/covid-19-assistance#:~:text=Over%20the%20past%2020%20years,advance%20the%20country’s%20development%20goals.

Cite this page

Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines. (2020, Apr 02). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/

"Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines." PapersOwl.com , 2 Apr 2020, https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/ [Accessed: 24 Aug. 2024]

"Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines." PapersOwl.com, Apr 02, 2020. Accessed August 24, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/

"Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines," PapersOwl.com , 02-Apr-2020. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/. [Accessed: 24-Aug-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2020). Economic and Cultural Transformation as a Result of Globalization in the Philippines . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/globalization-and-the-philippines/ [Accessed: 24-Aug-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

The Globalisation Experience and Its Challenges for the Philippine Economy

BIS Paper No. 100q

14 Pages Posted: 13 Feb 2019

Diwa C. Guinigundo

Government of the republic of the philippines - monetary stability sector.

Date Written: December 21, 2018

This paper analyses the extent and impact of globalisation in the Philippines in terms of trade, finance and migration. In the Philippines, trade globalisation and migration have been more prominent than financial globalisation. While empirical estimates show that globalisation has positively affected the country’s economic growth and employment, substantial evidence for its impact on inequality and poverty has yet to be found, as preliminary estimates show mixed results. There are both winners and losers among industries and in the labour market. Thus, more inclusive policies could potentially help cushion the negative consequences of globalisation and facilitate adjustments to narrow the gap between winners and losers. Towards this end, the Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas has made contributions primarily through its focus on low and stable inflation; the facilitation of greater financial inclusion; and greater involvement in global cooperation efforts to further strengthen rule-based international transactions. Full Publication: Globalisation and Deglobalisation

Keywords: impact of globalisation, challenges of globalisation, policy response to globalisation, migration, remittances, financial inclusion, Philippines

JEL Classification: F6, F62, F63, F66, F68, F22, F24

Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation

Diwa C. Guinigundo (Contact Author)

Philippines

Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?

Paper statistics, related ejournals, international finance ejournal.

Subscribe to this fee journal for more curated articles on this topic

International Trade eJournal

Emerging markets economics: macroeconomic issues & challenges ejournal.

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

Is globalization an engine of economic development?

All people living in today's world have experienced some of the benefits of globalization: the expansion of foreign trade has meant that vaccines and antibiotics produced in a handful of countries have been widely used all over the world to eradicate diseases and treat deadly infections. Since 1900, life expectancy has increased in every country in the world , and global average life expectancy has more than doubled .

Globalization has also been a key driver of unprecedented economic growth and as a result, we now live in a world with much less poverty .

Yet these achievements are the product of multiple forces, and globalization is only one of them. The increasing potential of governments to collect revenues and redistribute resources through social transfers has been another important factor contributing to improved standards of living around the world. Neither free market capitalism nor social democracy alone has been responsible for economic development. On the contrary, they often work together.

In this blog post, we discuss in more detail the evidence behind these claims.

The rise of globalization

International trade has been part of the world economy for thousands of years . Despite this long history, the importance of foreign trade was modest until the beginning of the 19th century—the sum of worldwide exports and imports never exceeded 10% of global output before 1800 .

Then around 1820 things started to change quickly. Around that time, technological advances and political liberalism triggered what we know today as the 'first wave of globalization'.

This first wave of globalization came to an end with the beginning of the First World War, when the decline of liberalism and the rise of nationalism led to a collapse in international trade. But this was temporary and after the Second World War, trade started growing again. This second wave of globalization, which continues today, has seen international trade grow faster than ever before. Today, around 60% of all goods and services produced in the world are shipped across country borders. (In our entry on International Trade you find more details regarding the particular features that characterize the first and second waves of globalization.)

The chart here shows the remarkable growth of foreign trade since 1800. The series shows the value of world exports in constant prices—world exports have been indexed, so that values are relative to the value of exports in the year 1913.

The broad trend in this chart is striking: Trade followed an exponential path. Other metrics of trade, such as the share of imports and exports in global output , tell the same story.

In just a few generations, globalization completely changed the world economy.

The correlation between globalization, economic growth and poverty reductions

In the period in which international trade expanded, the average world income increased substantially and the share of the population living in extreme poverty went down continuously.

GDP per capita is a common metric used for measuring national average incomes. By this measure, average incomes followed a similar growth pattern to international trade. For thousands of years, global GDP per capita had a negligible growth rate: technological progress in the preindustrial world produced people rather than prosperity . Over the course of the 19th century, however, alongside the first wave of globalization, this changed substantially. In this period, economic growth started accelerating and global GDP per capita has been growing constantly over the last two centuries—with the exception of lower growth rates during the years between the two world wars. (You can read more about these trends in our entry on Economic Growth .)

Regarding extreme poverty, the available evidence shows that up until 1800, the vast majority of people around the world lived in extreme deprivation , with only a tiny elite enjoying higher standards of living. In the 19th century we began making progress and the share of people living in extreme poverty started to slowly decline. This trend is shown in the chart here. As we can see, today, two hundred years later, the share of people living in extreme poverty is less than 10%. This is an achievement that would have been unthinkable to our ancestors. 1

The stark trend in the incidence of poverty is particularly remarkable if we consider that the world population increased 7-fold over the same period. In a world without economic growth, such an increase in the population would have resulted in less and less consumption for everyone. And yet, as the chart shows if you switch to the 'absolute' view, the exact opposite happened: in a time of unprecedented population growth, we managed to lift more and more people out of poverty.

Living with less than 1.90 dollars per day is difficult by any standard—the term 'extreme poverty' is appropriate. However, recent estimates show that no matter what global poverty line you choose, the share of people below that poverty line has declined . (In our entry on Global Extreme Poverty you can find more evidence supporting this important historical achievement.)

The link between globalization and absolute poverty

The fact that trade and average incomes followed similar upward trajectories in a period of unprecedented poverty reduction is of course not proof of a causal relationship. However, both evidence and theory suggest that what we observe is more than an accidental correlation.

Trade facilitates efficiency gains that are materialized in aggregate economic growth. From a conceptual point of view, international trade contributes to economic growth by allowing nations to specialize, in order to produce goods that they are relatively efficient at producing, while importing other goods. There is substantial empirical evidence backing this causal mechanism .

If trade leads to growth in average incomes, what does this mean for poverty? In a much-cited 2002 academic article, David Dollar and Aart Kraay empirically showed that on average, the income of the poorest grew one-for-one with average national incomes over the last four decades of the 20th century. 2 This means that trade has helped raise the incomes of the poor as much as it has helped raise average incomes. More recent articles have confirmed the original findings from Dollar and Kraay. 3

When taken together, the evidence thus tells us that globalization has contributed to reducing poverty around the world.

The link between globalization and inequality

That globalization is good for the poor is a statement that is true on average . In some countries and in some periods the poor did better than average, and sometimes they did worse.

Looking at the long-run average effect is very helpful to form an opinion regarding broad trends. However, these broad trends are not necessarily informative about how trade has affected the distribution of incomes generally; nor about how trade has affected specific groups of people in specific periods.

The same economic principles that suggest we should lend serious consideration to the efficiency gains from trade, suggest that we should do likewise for the distributional consequences from trade. If globalization generates growth by allowing countries to specialize in the production of goods that intensively use locally abundant resources, it is natural to expect that differences in the way resources are endowed will translate into differences in the way benefits are reaped.

If we take a look at the data, we observe that the process of globalization and growth that led to historical achievements in poverty reductions went along with a substantial increase in global income inequality .

The chart shows this by comparing the global income distribution at three points in time: 1800, 1975, and 2015. We can see that the world today is both much richer and more unequal than it was in 1800.

There are two forces that can drive global income inequality : within-country differences in incomes, and between-country differences in incomes. Which of the two is driving the trend we observe in this chart? The evidence suggests that it is the latter—global inequality increased in the period 1800-1975 because the countries that industrialized earlier grew faster.

In 1800, only a few countries had achieved economic growth while the majority of the world still lived in poverty. In the following century, more and more countries achieved sustained economic growth, and the global income distribution became much more unequal: there was a clear divergence between early-industrialized countries (where extreme forms of poverty were virtually eradicated) and the rest of the world. In the following decades and up until today, early-industrialized countries have continued growing, but the biggest changes have taken place at the bottom of the distribution. Today, global income inequality is lower than it was in 1975. But still, despite the ‘catch-up growth’ in recent decades, our world today is both much richer and more unequal than it was in 1800.

So, what does the data tell us about globalization? Over the last century, the gains from international trade were substantial and generally equally distributed within countries, but global inequality increased because for a long period early-industrialized countries had larger gains to distribute among their citizens.

The distribution of the gains from trade

The above conclusion that globalization has not had substantial effects on global inequality may seem paradoxical to some people—there is substantial evidence of growing inequality in many countries, including countries that have vehemently pursued trade liberalization. A notable case in point is the US, where income inequality has been on the rise in the last four decades, with incomes for the bottom 10% growing much more slowly than incomes for the top 10% . (You can read more about these within-country trends in our entry on Income Inequality .)

How can we reconcile these two empirical facts? In a recent article, Elhanan Helpman provides an answer informed by a meta-analysis of the available evidence: factors such as automation, technological changes, and market frictions, have contributed to the rise of inequality more than growth in international trade has. 4

If this is the case, then why has the view that globalization is bad for the working class captured the political debate in rich countries? Part of the answer has to do with the fact that people are misinformed about the evidence. But another important reason is that, while globalization may not have been the prime cause of growing inequality within many rich countries, it remains true that there are specific groups of people who have not reaped many of the benefits from globalization in recent years.

Daniel Trefler published a paper in 2004 showing that the 1989 free trade agreement between the US and Canada temporarily increased (for about three years) the level of unemployment in Canada. 5 And David Autor and colleagues published another much cited article in 2013 showing that imports from China had diverging effects on employment across various geographical zones in the US, with employment declining more in zones where industries were more exposed to import competition from China. 6

These effects on specific groups are real and need to be taken into account, even if they do not imply that ‘globalization is bad for the poor’. Public policies should protect and compensate workers whose earnings are adversely affected by globalization. And as a matter of fact, public policies in rich countries have done this to some degree in the past. As painful as job losses are for the affected workers, it is thanks to unemployment benefits and other safety-net policies that we do not observe unemployment leading to widespread extreme poverty in rich countries.

Which way forward?

Has globalization been an engine of economic development? The answer is yes. Globalization has had a positive effect on economic growth, contributing to rising living standards and the reduction of extreme poverty across the world.

Can we conclude from this that we should strive for a ‘hyper-globalized’ world economy in which there is completely free trade with no room for public policy and regulation? The answer is no.

The point is that the worldwide historical achievements that we can attribute to globalization are not independent of other factors, including the potential of governments to redistribute resources. Indeed, as the last chart here shows, the process of globalization that we have experienced in the last couple of centuries took place at the same time as governments increased their potential for taxing and redirecting resources through public policies, particularly social transfers.

How much integration in global markets would be optimal? I would be skeptical of anyone who offers a definitive answer. But it seems unlikely that the optimal degree of integration is either of the two extremes—neither ‘hyper-protectionism’ nor ‘hyper-globalization’ is likely to be the answer.

Policies aimed at liberalizing trade, and policies aimed at providing social safety nets, are often advocated by different groups, and it is common for these groups to argue that they are in conflict. But both economic theory and the empirical evidence from the successful fight against extreme poverty suggests this is a mistake: globalization and social policy should be treated as complements rather than substitutes.

The data in the chart here measures ‘extreme poverty’ as defined by the World Bank; people are considered to live in extreme poverty if they have to get by with less than 1.90 ‘international dollars’ per day. International dollars are a hypothetical currency that corrects incomes for differences in price levels in different countries as well as for inflation (explained by us here ).

Dollar, David, and Aart Kraay. "Growth is Good for the Poor." Journal of economic growth 7.3 (2002): 195-225.

See, for example, Dollar and Kraay (2004), "Trade, growth, and poverty." The Economic Journal 114.493 (2004) ; and Dollar, Kleineberg and Kraay (2014), "Growth, inequality, and social welfare : cross-country evidence." Policy Research Working Paper.

Helpman, Elhanan. Globalization and Wage Inequality. No. w22944. National Bureau of Economic Research, 2016.

Trefler, Daniel. "The long and short of the Canada-US free trade agreement." The American Economic Review 94.4 (2004): 870-895.

David, H., David Dorn, and Gordon H. Hanson. "The China syndrome: Local labor market effects of import competition in the United States." The American Economic Review 103.6 (2013): 2121-2168.

Cite this work

Our articles and data visualizations rely on work from many different people and organizations. When citing this article, please also cite the underlying data sources. This article can be cited as:

BibTeX citation

Reuse this work freely

All visualizations, data, and code produced by Our World in Data are completely open access under the Creative Commons BY license . You have the permission to use, distribute, and reproduce these in any medium, provided the source and authors are credited.

The data produced by third parties and made available by Our World in Data is subject to the license terms from the original third-party authors. We will always indicate the original source of the data in our documentation, so you should always check the license of any such third-party data before use and redistribution.

All of our charts can be embedded in any site.

Our World in Data is free and accessible for everyone.

Help us do this work by making a donation.

Home — Essay Samples — Sociology — Globalization — Reflection About Globalization in the Philippines

Reflection About Globalization in The Philippines

• Categories: Globalization Philippines

About this sample

Words: 474 |

Published: Jan 5, 2023

Words: 474 | Page: 1 | 3 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Verified writer

• Expert in: Sociology Geography & Travel

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 619 words

2 pages / 692 words

2 pages / 956 words

1 pages / 890 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Globalization

Harrison, A (2013) FOB/CIF Issue in Merchandise Trade/Transport of Goods in BPM6 and the 2008 SNA, Twenty-Fifth Meeting of the IMF Committee on Balance of Payments Statistics, Washington, D.C.Tetlow, G (2018) The short-term [...]

English is a global language spoken by millions of people around the world. It is the official language of many countries and serves as a lingua franca in various fields such as business, science, and technology. Like any [...]

Globalization is a multifaceted phenomenon that has reshaped the world in numerous ways. It refers to the increasing interconnectedness and interdependence of the world's markets and businesses. This process has accelerated in [...]

Globalisation and Americanisation are two terms often used interchangeably in popular discourse, yet they encompass fundamentally different phenomena. While both reflect significant cultural, economic, and political changes on a [...]

Globalisation and overseas ventures have made today’s workplace boundarlyless where no one works in isolation (Friedman, 2005). In fact today’s work environment is characterised as volatile, uncertain, complex, and ambiguous [...]

In popular discourse, globalization is often synonymous with internationalization, referring to the growing interconnectedness and interdependence of people and institutions throughout the world. Although these terms have [...]

Related Topics

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

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Globalization: Definition, Benefits, Effects, Examples – What is Globalization?

• Publié le 21 January 2019
• Mis à jour le 25 March 2024

Globalization – what is it? What is the definition of globalization? Benefits and negative effects? What are the top examples of globalization? What famous quotes have been said about globalization?

What is Globalization? All Definitions of Globalization

A simple globalization definition.

Globalization means the speedup of movements and exchanges (of human beings, goods, and services, capital, technologies or cultural practices) all over the planet. One of the effects of globalization is that it promotes and increases interactions between different regions and populations around the globe.

• Related: Traveling Today And Tomorrow: Cities And Countries With More Travelers

An Official Definition of Globalization by the World Health Organization (WHO)

According to WHO , globalization can be defined as ” the increased interconnectedness and interdependence of peoples and countries. It is generally understood to include two inter-related elements: the opening of international borders to increasingly fast flows of goods, services, finance, people and ideas; and the changes in institutions and policies at national and international levels that facilitate or promote such flows.”

What Is Globalization in the Economy?

According to the Committee for Development Policy (a subsidiary body of the United Nations), from an economic point of view, globalization can be defined as: “(…) the increasing interdependence of world economies as a result of the growing scale of cross-border trade of commodities and services, the flow of international capital and the wide and rapid spread of technologies. It reflects the continuing expansion and mutual integration of market frontiers (…) and the rapid growing significance of information in all types of productive activities and marketization are the two major driving forces for economic globalization.”

• Related: Planet VS Economy: How Coronavirus Is Unraveling A Dysfunctional System

What Is Globalization in Geography?

In geography, globalization is defined as the set of processes (economic, social, cultural, technological, institutional) that contribute to the relationship between societies and individuals around the world. It is a progressive process by which exchanges and flows between different parts of the world are intensified.

Globalization and the G20: What is the G20?

The G20 is a global bloc composed by the governments and central bank governors from 19 countries and the European Union (EU). Established in 1999, the G20 gathers the most important industrialized and developing economies to discuss international economic and financial stability. Together, the nations of the G20 account for around 80% of global economic output, nearly 75 percent of all global trade, and about two-thirds of the world’s population.

G20 leaders get together in an annual summit to discuss and coordinate pressing global issues of mutual interest. Though economics and trade are usually the centerpieces of each summit’s agenda, issues like climate change, migration policies, terrorism, the future of work, or global wealth are recurring focuses too. Since the G20 leaders represent the “ political backbone of the global financial architecture that secures open markets, orderly capital flows, and a safety net for countries in difficulty”, it is often thanks to bilateral meetings during summits that major international agreements are achieved and that globalization is able to move forward.

The joint action of G20 leaders has unquestionably been useful to save the global financial system in the 2008/2009 crisis, thanks to trade barriers removal and the implementation of huge financial reforms. Nonetheless, the G20 was been struggling to be successful at coordinating monetary and fiscal policies and unable to root out tax evasion and corruption, among other downsides of globalization. As a result of this and other failures from the G20 in coordinating globalization, popular, nationalist movements across the world have been defending countries should pursue their interests alone or form fruitful coalitions.

How Do We Make Globalization More Just?

The ability of countries to rise above narrow self-interest has brought unprecedented economic wealth and plenty of applicable scientific progress. However, for different reasons, not everyone has been benefiting the same from globalization and technological change: wealth is unfairly distributed and economic growth came at huge environmental costs. How can countries rise above narrow self-interest and act together or designing fairer societies and a healthier planet? How do we make globalization more just?

According to Christine Lagarde , former President of the International Monetary Fund, “ debates about trade and access to foreign goods are as old as society itself ” and history tells us that closing borders or protectionism policies are not the way to go, as many countries doing it have failed.

Lagarde defends we should pursue globalization policies that extend the benefits of openness and integration while alleviating their side effects. How to make globalization more just is a very complex question that involves redesigning economic systems. But how? That’s the question.

Globalization is deeply connected with economic systems and markets, which, on their turn, impact and are impacted by social issues, cultural factors that are hard to overcome, regional specificities, timings of action and collaborative networks. All of this requires, on one hand, global consensus and cooperation, and on the other, country-specific solutions, apart from a good definition of the adjective “just”.

When Did Globalization Begin? The History of Globalization

For some people, this global phenomenon is inherent to human nature. Because of this, some say globalization begun about 60,000 years ago, at the beginning of human history. Throughout time, human societies’ exchanging trade has been growing. Since the old times, different civilizations have developed commercial trade routes and experienced cultural exchanges. And as well, the migratory phenomenon has also been contributing to these populational exchanges. Especially nowadays, since traveling became quicker, more comfortable, and more affordable.

This phenomenon has continued throughout history, notably through military conquests and exploration expeditions. But it wasn’t until technological advances in transportation and communication that globalization speeded up. It was particularly after the second half of the 20th century that world trades accelerated in such a dimension and speed that the term “globalization” started to be commonly used.

• Are we living oppositely to sustainable development?

Examples of Globalization (Concept Map)

Because of trade developments and financial exchanges, we often think of globalization as an economic and financial phenomenon. Nonetheless, it includes a much wider field than just flowing of goods, services or capital. Often referred to as the globalization concept map, s ome examples of globalization are:

• Economic globalization : is the development of trade systems within transnational actors such as corporations or NGOs;
• Financial globalization : can be linked with the rise of a global financial system with international financial exchanges and monetary exchanges. Stock markets, for instance, are a great example of the financially connected global world since when one stock market has a decline, it affects other markets negatively as well as the economy as a whole.
• Cultural globalization : refers to the interpenetration of cultures which, as a consequence, means nations adopt principles, beliefs, and costumes of other nations, losing their unique culture to a unique, globalized supra-culture;
• Political globalization : the development and growing influence of international organizations such as the UN or WHO means governmental action takes place at an international level. There are other bodies operating a global level such as NGOs like Doctors without borders  or Oxfam ;
• Sociological globalization : information moves almost in real-time, together with the interconnection and interdependence of events and their consequences. People move all the time too, mixing and integrating different societies;
• Technological globalization: the phenomenon by which millions of people are interconnected thanks to the power of the digital world via platforms such as Facebook, Instagram, Skype or Youtube.
• Geographic globalization: is the new organization and hierarchy of different regions of the world that is constantly changing. Moreover, with transportation and flying made so easy and affordable, apart from a few countries with demanding visas, it is possible to travel the world without barely any restrictions;
• Ecological globalization: accounts for the idea of considering planet Earth as a single global entity – a common good all societies should protect since the weather affects everyone and we are all protected by the same atmosphere. To this regard, it is often said that the poorest countries that have been polluting the least will suffer the most from climate change .

The Benefits of Globalization

Globalization has benefits that cover many different areas. It reciprocally developed economies all over the world and increased cultural exchanges. It also allowed financial exchanges between companies, changing the paradigm of work. Many people are nowadays citizens of the world. The origin of goods became secondary and geographic distance is no longer a barrier for many services to happen. Let’s dig deeper.

The Engine of Globalization – An Economic Example

The most visible impacts of globalization are definitely the ones affecting the economic world. Globalization has led to a sharp increase in trade and economic exchanges, but also to a multiplication of financial exchanges.

In the 1970s world economies opened up and the development of free trade policies accelerated the globalization phenomenon. Between 1950 and 2010, world exports increased 33-fold. This significantly contributed to increasing the interactions between different regions of the world.

This acceleration of economic exchanges has led to strong global economic growth. It fostered as well a rapid global industrial development that allowed the rapid development of many of the technologies and commodities we have available nowadays.

Knowledge became easily shared and international cooperation among the brightest minds speeded things up. According to some analysts, globalization has also contributed to improving global economic conditions, creating much economic wealth (thas was, nevertheless, unequally distributed – more information ahead).

Globalization Benefits – A Financial Example

At the same time, finance also became globalized. From the 1980s, driven by neo-liberal policies, the world of finance gradually opened. Many states, particularly the US under Ronald Reagan and the UK under Margaret Thatcher introduced the famous “3D Policy”: Disintermediation, Decommissioning, Deregulation.

The idea was to simplify finance regulations, eliminate mediators and break down the barriers between the world’s financial centers. And the goal was to make it easier to exchange capital between the world’s financial players. This financial globalization has contributed to the rise of a global financial market in which contracts and capital exchanges have multiplied.

Globalization – A Cultural Example

Together with economic and financial globalization, there has obviously also been cultural globalization. Indeed, the multiplication of economic and financial exchanges has been followed by an increase in human exchanges such as migration, expatriation or traveling. These human exchanges have contributed to the development of cultural exchanges. This means that different customs and habits shared among local communities have been shared among communities that (used to) have different procedures and even different beliefs.

Good examples of cultural globalization are, for instance, the trading of commodities such as coffee or avocados. Coffee is said to be originally from Ethiopia and consumed in the Arabid region. Nonetheless, due to commercial trades after the 11th century, it is nowadays known as a globally consumed commodity. Avocados , for instance, grown mostly under the tropical temperatures of Mexico, the Dominican Republic or Peru. They started by being produced in small quantities to supply the local populations but today guacamole or avocado toasts are common in meals all over the world.

At the same time, books, movies, and music are now instantaneously available all around the world thanks to the development of the digital world and the power of the internet. These are perhaps the greatest contributors to the speed at which cultural exchanges and globalization are happening. There are also other examples of globalization regarding traditions like Black Friday in the US , the Brazilian Carnival or the Indian Holi Festival. They all were originally created following their countries’ local traditions and beliefs but as the world got to know them, they are now common traditions in other countries too.

Why Is Globalization Bad? The Negative Effects of Globalization

Globalization is a complex phenomenon. As such, it has a considerable influence on several areas of contemporary societies. Let’s take a look at some of the main negative effects globalization has had so far.

The Negative Effects of Globalization on Cultural Loss

Apart from all the benefits globalization has had on allowing cultural exchanges it also homogenized the world’s cultures. That’s why specific cultural characteristics from some countries are disappearing. From languages to traditions or even specific industries. That’s why according to UNESCO , the mix between the benefits of globalization and the protection of local culture’s uniqueness requires a careful approach.

The Economic Negative Effects of Globalization

Despite its benefits, the economic growth driven by globalization has not been done without awakening criticism. The consequences of globalization are far from homogeneous: income inequalities, disproportional wealth and trades that benefit parties differently. In the end, one of the criticisms is that some actors (countries, companies, individuals) benefit more from the phenomena of globalization, while others are sometimes perceived as the “losers” of globalization. As a matter of fact, a recent report from Oxfam says that 82% of the world’s generated wealth goes to 1% of the population.

• Related: Globally, Business And Government Lack Trust, A New Survey Shows

The Negative Effects of Globalization on the Environment

At the same time, global economic growth and industrial productivity are both the driving force and the major consequences of globalization. They also have big environmental consequences as they contribute to the depletion of natural resources, deforestation and the destruction of ecosystems and loss of biodiversity . The worldwide distribution of goods is also creating a big garbage problem, especially on what concerns plastic pollution .

• How Air Pollution And Diabetes Kill Millions Every Year
• Changing Aircrafts’ Altitude To Reduce The Climatic Impact Of Contrails
• Are Avocados Truly Sustainable?

Globalization, Sustainable Development, and CSR

Globalization affects all sectors of activity to a greater or lesser extent. By doing so, its gap with issues that have to do with  sustainable development  and  corporate social responsibility  is short.

By promoting large-scale industrial production and the globalized circulation of goods, globalization is sometimes opposed to concepts such as resource savings, energy savings or the limitation of greenhouse gases . As a result, critics of globalization often argue that it contributes to accelerating climate change and that it does not respect the principles of ecology. At the same time, big companies that don’t give local jobs and choose instead to use the manpower of countries with low wages (to have lower costs) or pay taxes in countries with more favorable regulations is also opposed to the criteria of a CSR approach. Moreover, the ideologies of economic growth and the constant pursuit of productivity that come along with globalization, also make it difficult to design a sustainable economy based on  resilience .

On the other hand, globalization is also needed for the transitioning to a more sustainable world, since only a global synergy would really be able to allow a real ecological transition. Issues such as global warming indeed require a coordinated response from all global players: fight against CO2 emissions, reduction of waste, a transition to renewable energies . The same goes for ocean or air pollution, or ocean acidification, problems that can’t be solved without global action. The dissemination of green ideas also depends on the ability of committed actors to make them heard globally.

• What Are The Benefits Of Having A Network Of CSR Ambassadors?
• 5 Tips For Organizations To Develop Their CSR Strategy In 2020
• Top 10 Companies With The Best Corporate (CSR) Reputation In 2020

The Road From Globalization to Regionalization

Regionalization can also be analyzed from a corporate perspective. For instance, businesses such as McDonald’s or Starbucks don’t sell exactly the same products everywhere. In some specific stores, they consider people’s regional habits. That’s why the McChicken isn’t sold in India, whereas in Portugal there’s a steak sandwich menu like the ones you can get in a typical Portuguese restaurant.

Politically speaking, when left-wing parties are in power they tend to focus on their country’s people, goods and services. Exchanges with the outside world aren’t seen as very valuable and importations are often left aside.

• Related: Why Is It Important To Support Local And Small Businesses?

Globalization Quotes by World Influencers

Many world leaders, decision-makers and influential people have spoken about globalization. Some stand out its positive benefits and others focus deeper on its negative effects. Find below some of the most interesting quotes on this issue.

Politic Globalization Quotes

Globalization quote by the former U.S President Bill Clinton ??

No generation has had the opportunity, as we now have, to build a global economy that leaves no-one behind. It is a wonderful opportunity, but also a profound responsibility.

Globalization quote by Barack Obama , former U.S. president ??

Globalization is a fact, because of technology, because of an integrated global supply chain, because of changes in transportation. And we’re not going to be able to build a wall around that.

Globalization quote by Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former International Monetary Fund Managing Director ??

“We can’t speak day after day about globalization without at the same time having in mind that…we need multilateral solutions.”

Globalization quote by Stephen Harper , former Prime Minister of Canada ??

“We have to remember we’re in a global economy. The purpose of fiscal stimulus is not simply to sustain activity in our national economies but to help the global economy as well, and that’s why it’s so critical that measures in those packages avoid anything that smacks of protectionism.”

Globalization quote by Julia Gillard , Prime Minister of Australia ??

“My guiding principle is that prosperity can be shared. We can create wealth together. The global economy is not a zero-sum game.”

Other Globalization Quotes

Globalization quote by the spiritual leader Dalai Lama ??

“I find that because of modern technological evolution and our global economy, and as a result of the great increase in population, our world has greatly changed: it has become much smaller. However, our perceptions have not evolved at the same pace; we continue to cling to old national demarcations and the old feelings of ‘us’ and ‘them’.”

The famous German sociologist Ulrich Beck also spoke of globalization ??

“Globalization is not only something that will concern and threaten us in the future, but something that is taking place in the present and to which we must first open our eyes.”

Globalization quote by Bill Gates, owner and former CEO of Microsoft ??

“The fact is that as living standards have risen around the world, world trade has been the mechanism allowing poor countries to increasingly take care of really basic needs, things like vaccination.”

Globalization quote by John Lennon, member of the music band The Beatles ??

Imagine there’s no countries. It isn’t hard to do. Nothing to kill or die for. And no religion, too. Imagine all the people. Living life in peace. You, you may say I’m a dreamer. But I’m not the only one. I hope someday you will join us. And the world will be as one

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  

112k Accesses

48 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

Explore related subjects.

• Medical Ethics

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

• Top Stories
• Stock Market
• BUYING RATES
• FOREIGN INTEREST RATES
• Philippine Mutual Funds
• Leaders and Laggards
• Stock Quotes
• Stock Markets Summary
• Non-BSP Convertible Currencies
• BSP Convertible Currencies
• US Commodity futures
• Infographics
• B-Side Podcasts
• Agribusiness
• Arts & Leisure
• Special Features
• Special Reports
• BW Launchpad

• Editors' Picks

Philippines may benefit from new globalization

By Beatrice M. Laforga, Reporter

THE PHILIPPINES could benefit substantially from the ongoing massive shift in global trade, with the services sector likely to see the most gains, the Asian Development Bank (ADB) said.

While the coronavirus pandemic and lockdowns disrupted global economy and trade, the ADB said Asia should adopt stronger trade liberalization and facilitation efforts so it can benefit from economies realigning their supply chain networks.

“I do believe that the Philippines has a strong potential given that its post-pandemic trade landscape will give more weight on the digital and services trade,” ADB Economic Research and Regional Cooperation Department Director for Regional Cooperation and Integration Cyn-Young Park said during the launch of the Asian Economic Integration Report (AEIR) 2021 on Wednesday.

The Philippines’ services sector will likely be among the gainers in the new round of globalization where digital transformation plays a key role, Ms. Park said. She noted Filipino workers may take on services-related jobs abroad, while the local business process outsourcing (BPO) sector remains intact.

The ADB noted cross-border migration took a huge blow last year, while the impact on remittance inflows especially to countries that rely on these remained “acute.”

“Despite the large drop, remittances to Asia will likely remain a relatively stable source of external financing compared with other types of financial flows,” it said.

Cash remittances to the Philippines inched down by 0.8% to $27.013 billion in the first 11 months of 2020, data from the central bank showed.

In the report, the ADB said Southeast Asia remained the most integrated subregion across Asia-Pacific, driven by trade, investments and migration of people.

This is based on the Asia-Pacific Regional Cooperation and Integration Index (ARCII) — which measures the regional integration of economies based on 26 indicators and in six dimensions.

The pandemic has also made digital transformation for countries crucial to boost the broader economic output, especially on trade and commerce and employment.

The ADB projected Southeast Asian economies could record an annual gain of 8.4% in regional output on average, if the digital sector expands by 20% in 2025%. Meanwhile, the region’s trade and employment could increase by an average of 8% and 6.2%, respectively.

“Digital connectivity in Asia has increased, with rising internet penetration, but large subregional gaps persist. Greater access to online resources through internet connectivity allows consumers, businesses, and governments to gain wider and better access to goods and services beyond geographic borders,” the report said.

Internet penetration in the Philippines was among the lowest in selected 20 Asian economies between 2006-2017. The rate of connectivity, however, increased significantly in 2014-2017, similar to all the other countries.

“Asia will continue its rise as a major player in the global digital platform market as wider access reaches more users and generates higher revenue growth,” the multilateral lender said.

However, countries should ensure that they are prepared to address the digital divide and prevent inequality from worsening.

The Philippines has a lot of catching up to do, as it scored 0.8221 in the Digital Platform Penetration (DPP) index in Network Readiness Subindexes which measured the country’s readiness on: technology, people, governance and impact. The country placed 13 th out of 34 Asia-Pacific economies tracked.

China topped the list with a DPP index score of 2.5847, Korea at 2.5283, Australia at 2.1010, Hong Kong at 2.0323, New Zealand at 1.8795, and Japan at 1.7794.

“This suggests that in order to sustainably develop the domestic digital platform economy, governments cannot slacken in upgrading the underlying infrastructure and regulatory foundations,” it added.

At the bottom of the list were Turkmenistan, Papua New Guinea, Timor-Leste, Lao PDR and Mongolia.

“For countries in the lowest group, there is a great need to catch up in all four aspects of network readiness,” it added.

The ADB said broader use of digital platforms could help countries achieve economic inclusion given that proper policies are in place.

RELATED ARTICLES MORE FROM AUTHOR

Inflation could further ease in Q4

InstaPay, PESONet transactions jump by 34.6%

Quezon City plans to amend Incentives Code

And while the government forecasts a slight rebound in 2021, some analysts are concerned over an uncertain and weak recovery, due to the country’s protracted lockdown and inability to shift to a more efficient containment strategy. The Philippines has relied instead on draconian mobility restrictions across large sections of the country’s key cities and growth hubs every time a COVID-19 surge threatens to overwhelm the country’s health system.

What went wrong?

How does one of the fastest growing economies in Asia falter? It would be too simplistic to blame this all on the pandemic.

First, the Philippines’ economic model itself appears more vulnerable to disease outbreak. It is built around the mobility of people, yet tourism, services, and remittances-fed growth are all vulnerable to pandemic-induced lockdowns and consumer confidence decline. International travel plunged, tourism came to a grinding halt, and domestic lockdowns and mobility restrictions crippled the retail sector, restaurants, and hospitality industry. Fortunately, the country’s business process outsourcing (BPO) sector is demonstrating some resilience — yet its main markets have been hit heavily by the pandemic, forcing the sector to rapidly upskill and adjust to emerging opportunities under the new normal.

Related Books

Thomas Wright, Colin Kahl

August 24, 2021

Jonathan Stromseth

February 16, 2021

Tarun Chhabra, Rush Doshi, Ryan Hass, Emilie Kimball

June 22, 2021

Second, pandemic handling was also problematic. Lockdown is useful if it buys a country time to strengthen health systems and test-trace-treat systems. These are the building blocks of more efficient containment of the disease. However, if a country fails to strengthen these systems, then it squanders the time that lockdown affords it. This seems to be the case for the Philippines, which made global headlines for implementing one of the world’s longest lockdowns during the pandemic, yet failed to flatten its COVID-19 curve.

At the time of writing, the Philippines is again headed for another hard lockdown and it is still trying to graduate to a more efficient containment strategy amidst rising concerns over the delta variant which has spread across Southeast Asia . It seems stuck with on-again, off-again lockdowns, which are severely damaging to the economy, and will likely create negative expectations for future COVID-19 surges (Figure 2).

Figure 2 clarifies how the Philippine government resorted to stricter lockdowns to temper each surge in COVID-19 in the country so far.

Figure 2: Community quarantine regimes during the COVID-19 pandemic, Philippine National Capital Region (NCR ), March 2020 to June 2021

If the delta variant and other possible variants are near-term threats, then the lack of efficient containment can be expected to force the country back to draconian mobility restrictions as a last resort. Meanwhile, only two months of social transfers ( ayuda ) were provided by the central government during 16 months of lockdown by mid-2021. All this puts more pressure on an already weary population reeling from deep recession, job displacement, and long-term risks on human development . Low social transfers support in the midst of joblessness and rising hunger is also likely to weaken compliance with mobility restriction policies.

Third, the Philippines suffered from delays in its vaccination rollout which was initially hobbled by implementation and supply issues, and later affected by lingering vaccine hesitancy . These are all likely to delay recovery in the Philippines.

By now there are many clear lessons both from the Philippine experience and from emerging international best practices. In order to mount a more successful economic recovery, the Philippines must address the following key policy issues:

• Build a more efficient containment strategy particularly against the threat of possible new variants principally by strengthening the test-trace-treat system. Based on lessons from other countries, test-trace-treat systems usually also involve comprehensive mass-testing strategies to better inform both the public and private sectors on the true state of infections among the population. In addition, integrated mobility databases (not fragmented city-based ones) also capacitate more effective and timely tracing. This kind of detailed and timely data allows for government and the private sector to better coordinate on nuanced containment strategies that target areas and communities that need help due to outbreak risk. And unlike a generalized lockdown, this targeted and data-informed strategy could allow other parts of the economy to remain more open than otherwise.
• Strengthen the sufficiency and transparency of direct social protection in order to give immediate relief to poor and low-income households already severely impacted by the mishandling of the pandemic. This requires a rebalancing of the budget in favor of education, health, and social protection spending, in lieu of an over-emphasis on build-build-build infrastructure projects. This is also an opportunity to enhance the social protection system to create a safety net and concurrent database that covers not just the poor but also the vulnerable low- and lower-middle- income population. The chief concern here would be to introduce social protection innovations that prevent middle income Filipinos from sliding into poverty during a pandemic or other crisis.
• Ramp-up vaccination to cover at least 70 percent of the population as soon as possible, and enlist the further support of the private sector and civil society in order to keep improving vaccine rollout. An effective communications campaign needs to be launched to counteract vaccine hesitancy, building on trustworthy institutions (like academia, the Catholic Church, civil society and certain private sector partners) in order to better protect the population against the threat of delta or another variant affecting the Philippines. It will also help if parts of government could stop the politically-motivated fearmongering on vaccines, as had occurred with the dengue fever vaccine, Dengvaxia, which continues to sow doubts and fears among parts of the population .
• Create a build-back-better strategy anchored on universal and inclusive healthcare. Among other things, such a strategy should a) acknowledge the critically important role of the private sector and civil society in pandemic response and healthcare sector cooperation, and b) underpin pandemic response around lasting investments in institutions and technology that enhance contact tracing (e-platforms), testing (labs), and universal healthcare with lower out-of-pocket costs and higher inclusivity. The latter requires a more inclusive, well-funded, and better-governed health insurance system.

As much of ASEAN reels from the spread of the delta variant, it is critical that the Philippines takes these steps to help allay concerns over the country’s preparedness to handle new variants emerging, while also recalibrating expectations in favor of resuscitating its economy. Only then can the Philippines avoid becoming the sick man of Asia again, and return to the rapid and steady growth of the pre-pandemic decade.

Related Content

Emma Willoughby

June 29, 2021

Adrien Chorn, Jonathan Stromseth

May 19, 2021

Thomas Pepinsky

January 26, 2021

Adrien Chorn provided editing assistance on this piece. The author thanks Jurel Yap and Kier J. Ballar for their research assistance. All views expressed herein are the author’s and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of his institution.

Foreign Policy

Southeast Asia

Center for Asia Policy Studies

Samantha Gross, Fred Dews

August 19, 2024

Marsin Alshamary

August 16, 2024

Vanda Felbab-Brown

August 14, 2024

• Corpus ID: 159285356

The Globalisation Experience and Its Challenges for the Philippine Economy

• Diwa C. Guinigundo
• Published 21 December 2018
• Economics, Political Science
• Emerging Markets Economics: Macroeconomic Issues & Challenges eJournal

3 Citations

An assessment: the philippine outstanding debt and other economic determinants towards its implication on economic growth, determinants of energy consumption: a review of the philippine energy sector, political and racial cronyism: combating strategies on the production rate, 24 references, the composition and management of capital flows in the philippines, going with remittances: the case of the philippines.

• Highly Influential

On Free Trade Agreements (FTAs): the Philippine Perspective

Remittances and household behavior in the philippines, trade liberalization and wage inequality in the philippines, analysing inflation dynamics in the philippines using the new keynesian phililips curve, the bpo challenge: leveraging capabilities, creating opportunities, globalization and glocalization: experiences in the local philippine context, determinants of overseas filipino worker (ofw) remittances, growth still is good for the poor, related papers.

Showing 1 through 3 of 0 Related Papers

Home / Essay Samples / World / Philippines / Effects of Globalization in the Philippines

Effects of Globalization in the Philippines

• Category: Social Issues , World
• Topic: Globalization , Philippines

Pages: 5 (2077 words)

• Downloads: -->

Introduction

Human rights, health and medicine.

• Beyer, P. (1994). Globalization and religious belief.
• https:www.tutor2u.netsociologyreferencesociology-globalisation-religious-beliefCallao, K. (n.d.). Negative effects of globalization in the philippines.
• https:www.ipl.orgessayNegative-Effects-Of-Globalization-In-The-Philippines-PC2BTK35UCBCP. (2020). 500 years of christianity.
• https:500yoc.com500-years-of-christianityGuinigundo, D. (2017). The globalisation experience and its challenges for the Philippines
• https:www.bis.orgpublbppdfbispap100_q.pdfMcCarthy, J. (2021). The philippines has vaccinated zero health-care workers so far.
• https:www.npr.orgsectionsgoatsandsoda20210218969008730the-philippines-has-vaccinated-zero-health-care-workers-so-farMiller, J. (2017). Religion in the philippines.
• https:asiasociety.orgeducationreligion-philippines#:~:text=The Philippines proudly boasts to,well over 100 Protestant denominationsParjanadze, N. (2019). Globalisation theories and their effect on education.
• https:www.econstor.euobitstream10419546311644238321.pdfReuters.com. (2021). Philippines' duterte defends purchase of chinese COVID-19 vaccine.
• https:www.reuters.comarticlehealth-coronavirus-philippines-vaccinephilippines-duterte-defends-purchase-of-chinese-covid-19-vaccine-idUSL4N2JO38SSantos, E. (2020). CHR to gov’t: acknowledge, address ICC findings on drug war.
• https:cnnphilippines.comnews20201216chr-philippines-international-criminal-court-duterte-drug-war.html?fbclid=IwAR1aR5DAIKd9tNrQ-0ljpwgz0Knly0MbI6GUpNITXVyxsmnsgYAKdCRvUrwThiel, R. (2017). Scarcity, science, technology, and globalization quotes.
• https:www.wisefamousquotes.comquotes-about-technology-globalizationhttps:businessmirror.com.ph20180221dost-advancing-science-technology-agenda-best-option-for-phl-growthUN.org. (n.d.). Universal declaration of human rights.
• https:www.un.orgenuniversal-declaration-human-rightsYoumatter.world. (2020). What is globalization.
• https:youmatter.worldendefinitiondefinitions-globalization-definition-benefits-effects-examples

--> ⚠️ 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!

Refugee Essays

Paris Essays

Texas Essays

California Essays

Canada 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 .--> -->