Advertisement

Debates Around Globalization, Poverty, and Inequality

  • Bahira Sherif Trask
Chapter

Abstract

Poverty and inequality lie at the heart of the controversy around globalization. Specifically, global economic integration is often perceived as widening the divide between poorer and richer countries, families, and individuals. Sen (2002) suggests that the main intent of the “anti-globalization” movement, which is itself a highly global form of organizing, is not globalization per se, but the perceived growing economic disparities that seem to stem from globalizing processes. While there is immense debate over poverty measurement and the actual number of individuals and families that live below certain standards, there is no disputing that poverty and inequality continue to impact the lives of millions around the globe. Moreover, in today’s world, visual images of poverty and wealth spread more easily and faster than ever before. This influences assessments of the material and ideological circumstances of external observers, as well as by the individuals of concern themselves.

It is difficult to draw conclusions about the actual effects of globalization on poverty and inequality, because the process itself is not just based on unbiased market forces or technological advancements. Instead, globalization occurs in specific contexts and is influenced by national and transnational policies. Nissanke and Thorbecke (2005) argue that, “despite the utmost importance of understanding the globalization-poverty nexus, the precise nature of the various mechanisms, whereby the on-going process of globalization has altered the pattern of income distribution, and the conditions facing the world’s poor are yet to be carefully analyzed. This is because the globalization-poverty relationship is complex and heterogeneous, involving multifaceted channels. It is highly probable that globalization-poverty relationships may be nonlinear in many aspects, involving several threshold effects” (p. 3). Ravallion (2003) also calls attention to the fact that the “starting point” for many countries differs with respect to their initial level of economic development, making it difficult to generalize across countries and regions.

Keywords

Income Inequality Poverty Line Poverty Reduction Global Poverty Global Economic Integration 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. Aisbett, E. (2007). Why are the critics so convinced that globalization is bad for the poor? In A. Harrison (Ed.), Globalization and poverty (pp. 33–85). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Basu, K. (2006). Globalization, poverty, and inequality: What is the relationship? What can e done? World Development, 34, 1361–1373.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Chen, S., & Ravallion, M. (2004). How have the world’s poorest fared since the early 1980s? The World Bank Research Observer, 19, 141–169.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dollar, D. (2005). Globalization, poverty and inequality since 1980. The World Bank Research Observer, 20, 146–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Graham, C. (2005). Globalization, poverty, inequality and insecurity: Some insights from the economics of happiness. WIDER Research Paper no. 2005/33.Google Scholar
  6. Harrison, A. (2007). Globalization and poverty. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Nissanke, M., & Thorbecke, E. (2005). The impact of globalization on the world’s poor: Transmission mechanisms. Paper presented at the WIDER Jubilee Conference in Helsinki.Google Scholar
  8. Ping, H. (2001). Talking about gender, globalization and labor in a Chinese context. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society, 26, 1278–1281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ravallion, M. (2003). The debate on globalization, poverty and inequality: Why measurement matters. International Affairs, 79, 739–753.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ravallion, M. (2004). Competing concepts of inequality in the globalization debate. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper 3243. Washington: World Bank.Google Scholar
  11. Robinson, W. (1998). Beyond nation-state paradigms: Globalization, sociology, and the challenge of transnational studies. Sociological Forum, 13, 561–594.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rudra, N. (2008). Globalization and the race to the bottom in developing countries: Who really gets hurt. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Santarelli, E., & Figini, P. (2002). Does globalization reduce poverty? Some empirical evidence for the developing countries. Understanding globalization, employment and poverty reduction. Working Paper for the International Labour Office (ILO) Project.Google Scholar
  14. Sen, A. (2002). Globalization, inequality and global protest. Development, 45, 11–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wade, R. H. (2004). Is globalization reducing poverty and inequality? World Development, 32(4), 567–589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Human Development and Family StudiesUniversity of DelawareNewarkUSA

Personalised recommendations