Further Reading > Sociology and Development >

Globalization and Development

In the recent decade the concept of "globalization" has gained popularity among sociologists. In the broadest sense, globalization refers to expanding worldwide flows of goods, persons, symbols, ideas, ideologies, and capital, entailing a "time-space compression"(Harvey 1989) of lived experience. Studying the economic domain of globalization, scholars argue that transnational corporations increasingly organize their production in "global commodity chains"(Gereffi 1994; Gereffi and Korzeniewicz 1994) spanning across a variety of social and institutional settings (Reich 1991; Castells 1997). The position of a nation-state or a region in such a production network becomes a dominant force in shaping socio-economic outcomes, such as labor conditions (Bonacich and al. 1994) or structures of inequality (Castells 1997; Sassen 1988; Sassen 1990). However, sociological research also emphasizes the persistent importance of the domestic political and social patterns and local cultural practices and traditions in mediating the effects of global economic flows (Putnam, Leonardi and Nanetti 1993; Saxenian 1994).

Further, sociologists have focused on the formation of a "global culture," that involves ontological assumptions, cognitive scripts and prescriptions for action with a worldwide reach (Boli and Thomas 1999; Meyer et al. 1997; Thomas et al. 1987). For many authors, the rapid growth of mass media penetration and cheap high-speed communication promote the homogenizing cultural construction of freely choosing, pleasure-seeking individual consumers around the globe (Barber 1995; Featherstone 1990; Ritzer 1993). Others argue that global culture rather propels cultural differentiation and diversity by diffusing principles of cultural relativism and cultural authenticity (Boli and Thomas 1999; Hannerz 1996). Local cultures adopt global symbols to specific local contexts and are thereby themselves constantly modified (Appadurai 1990; Appadurai 1996; Hall 1991). As these contrasting positions reflect, the debate remains largely unsettled of whether cultural globalization is harmful or beneficial to development as empowerment of individuals and societies.

In the political domain, sociological research has scrutinized the common assertion that states are doomed actors in a globalizing world. Findings illustrate that the state remains of critical importance, even as it is transformed in processes of globalization (Brenner 1999; Sassen 1996; Sassen 1998). The state continues to shape economic outcomes on the domestic and local level by promoting global competitiveness and by adapting institutions and policies that accommodate global capital flows. Research on migration illustrates this tension between the local and the global arguing that transnational communities of migrants channel the flow of social, economic, and cultural resources across national boundaries, thereby impacting development trajectories (Basch, Schiller and Blanc 1994; Glick Schiller, Basch and Blanc-Szanton 1992; Guarnizo 2001; Portes 1996; Pries 2001). The policy implications of this approach are to focus on local context and institutions for cushioning the effects of global economic flows.

[Further Reading]