The paper "Why Regionalism Has Become a Popular Strategy to Cope with Globalization" is a good example of business coursework. Global economic as well as social forces keep on affecting people and places everywhere. Despite its assertion as an instrument for universal growth, the adoption of a neo-liberal world view has basically led to an explanation in restoring and creating more power for the economic leaders, thus inviting strong competition among major global towns such as Paris, New York, Hong Kong, and London together with other cities all over Europe, North America, and Asia.
This global competition has instilled great pressure upon emerging cities to become more used to and receptive to global developments of modernity. Since the late 19th century, the growth and strengthening of free trade, global monetary systems, in addition to the mass movement of goods, services and people, have gone hand in hand with the need to join the globe through set of connections (Kaika and Swyngedouw, 2000). Optimizations in expertise definitely have led to homogeneous processes of architectural and urban delivery. However, it has been noted that there is a global occurrence of uneven development due to social, geographical as well as monetary exclusion or mixture of these factors (Harvey, 2006). In response the effects of globalization, the idea of regionalism attests to be such an effort to put a stop to a boisterous universalism.
At its root, regionalism is featured by main ideas of cultural production and identity as well as relationships of geographical zoning or neighborhood. What is seen today is a novel mercantilist strategy to foreign strategy, which has worries as to unregulated merchandise but goes beyond the state logic, in contention for a fragmented global arrangement that is composed of principally autonomous alliances big enough to make available for strong local marketplaces.
The New Regionalism appears to be a political will to slow down the process of globalization, with an aim of safeguarding some degree of territorial control and cultural diversity. This paper critically discusses why regionalism has become a popular strategy to cope with globalization. In order to address this heated concept, it would be important to examine the basic theoretical characterization of globalization through current interpretation and historical reference. Interpreting Globalization The term ‘ Globalization’ has a different meaning for various people.
It has a dual aspect and results to considerable confusion to people and nations. Its dichotomy comes from huge socio-economic, cultural as well as political inter-relations between global participants on one-hand, and splitting up and breakdown on the other. Globalization is linked with the universal increase of contemporary expertise of industrial manufacture as well as communication of various types across the borders of business, assets, and manufacture in addition to information. This increased association across borders is itself an aftermath of the increase of new-fangled expertise to till now pre-modern humanities. Globalization is a chronological development and thus does not necessitate that financial life be uniformly and rigorously incorporated all over the globe.
Globalization cannot be termed as an extraordinary situation, or a linear progression or even an ultimate end-point of societal transformation. Furthermore, globalization is not a universal state of identical amalgamation in a global financial movement. Rather, the augmented inter-connection of monetary movement all over the globe highlights uneven growth among diverse nations.
It overstates the dependence of marginal developing nations like African countries on developed nations like America (Henrique, 1996).
Global Economic Prospects and the Developing Countries. Washington, D.C.: The World Bank, 1999, pp 173.
Harvey, David. “Neoliberalism as Creative Destruction” in Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 2006. Vol. 88, No. 2, pp. 145-158.
Henrique F. Caroso, “Globalization and International Relations,” (paper presented at the University of Witswaterstrand, South Africa, 1996).
Kaika, Maria and Swyngedouw, Erik . “Fetishizing the Modern City: The Phantasmagoria of Urban Technological Networks” in International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 2000. Vol. 24, No. 1, pp. 120-138.
Nederveen Pieterse, J . Global Futures: shaping globalization. London, Zed Books. 2000.
Nederveen Pieterse, J. ‘Globalization as hybridization’, 1995 in M Featherstone, S Lash, R Robertson (eds) Global Modernities. London, Sage, pp 45-68
Ohmae Kenichi. The End of the Nation-State: The Rise of Regional Economies (London: HarperCollins, 1995), 367.
Ohmae, Kenichi. The Borderless World: Power and strategy in the global marketplace. London, HarperCollins, 1992.
Omahe, Kenichi. The End of the Nation State. The Rise of Rgional Economies. New York: Free Press Paperbacks. 1996.
R. O. Keohane, The World Political Economy and the Crisis of Embedded Liberalism, in J. H. Goldthorpe ed. (1984), Order and Conflict in Contemporary Capitalism, Clarendon Press, Oxford.
Richard Falk, “State of Siege: Will Globalization Win Out”? International Affairs 73 (1997): 316-24.
Schulz, Michael., Söderbaum, Fredric., and Öjendal, Joakim., Regionalization in a Globalizing World, London: Zed Books, 2001, p.5.
Sorens, Jason. Globalization, secessionism, and autonomy. USA, New Haven, Elsevier, 2004. 727-752
Vayrynen Raimo. Regionalism: Old and New. International Studies Review, 2003. Pp. 25 -51
Young, Soogil. “Globalism and regionalism: complements or competitors?” 1993. Pp. 111- 131 in Fred Bergsten y Marcus Noland (Eds.) Pacific Dynamism and the International Economic System. Washington, D. C.: Institute for International Economics, in Association with The Pacific Trade and Development Conference Secretariat and The Australian National University.