Globalisation on Jamaica Essay

1. Causes of globalization affecting Jamaica* For Jamaica, the main cause for globalization was darker. The energy Crisis of the early 1970s constrictd the Jamaican Government to take out loans from the supranational Monetary Fund and the World Bank to cover the rising expenses of fuel based imports. However they werent interested in cooperating with Jamaica in create native infrastructure and resources, so they en strained a short-term repayment of the debt, budget cuts in areas supporting long term development, and removing all clientele barriers that favored local anesthetic industry and farming. Thus, this started the forceful movement of globalization in Jamaica. Three negative globalization cases with causes and effects* The prototypic one involved Jamaicas dairy farm industry. Due to free exchange entertainments in the midst of the United States and Jamaica, dairy farmers in Jamaica had to directly compete with American farmers without any subsidy aid from the govern ment. This resulted in the influx of cheaper pulverize milk into Jamaica from the ground forces, destroying its entire dairy industry altogether and farmer selling cows to the slaughterhouse at a loss. The effect of globalization on Jamaica in this case, only fostered dependency on separate nations quite a than focusing on its own frugal development.* The second case is caused by the Banana Wars between atomic number 63 and America. Britain had a long-standing trade chordment with Jamaica that favored their banana exports as a way of compensating for their legacy of colonialism. This brought nigh complaints to the World Trade Organization (WTO) by the USA backed up by large artless multinational corporations like Dole, Chiquita and Delmonte who at the time already had 95% of the worlds banana trade, citing it as unconstitutional and against WTOs policy. The ruling of WTO in USAs favor and an international penetration of trade into Jamaicas biggest banana market ensured yet a nother downfall upon one of the democracys almost profitable industries overdue to the lack of production efficiency.* The third case came about due to the increasing economic stagnation and need in Jamaica. To combat this, the government agreed to create Free Trade Zones in Kingston where governmental enforcement does not apply. Ships would unload materials cut in the USA and Jamaican workers would sew garments in huge textile assembly plants near the docks for Hanes, Brooks Brothers and Tommy Hilfiger at $30 per week. These wages were not bountiful to sustain their standard of life and when protests emerge, the owners simply c flake outd down their shops and relocated to Mexico, where a cheaper work force can be found. This is an model of the race to the bottom stemming from the effects of globalized capitalism. As a result, it leaves Jamaican citizens with regress or lose situation to either comply with unfair demands of employers or risk unemployment.2. 3 examples in fa shioning Global Labour fair* In order to mention Global Labour fair, terzetto sectors of society, government, multinationals and civil societies must work together using their own sets of expertise. * The first example involves the Clinton administration regarding their side on trade in 1996. The government provided the resources and the stage to gather civil societies such as merciful rights NGOs and trade unions, industry leaders, and its own department of labor to discuss about responsibilities in Global Labour. complaisant societies present at the meetings gave ideas and insights about developing a global code of conduct in making labour fair as well as NGOs such as the Fair Labour tie beam provided awareness to the public about this matter. Then multinationals and industry leaders collaborated by implementing this code of conduct passim their supply chain, terminating contracts from their suppliers if specific labour conditions are not met. Thus forcing the improvement o f Labour standards.* The second example involves the New Zealand Recognized Seasonal Employers Scheme (RSE) to relieve seasonal shortages in the NZ horticulture and viticulture industry through an overseas labour force. The NZ government collaborated with other governments of the Pacific Island Regions to provide the legal requirements and immigration processes to facilitate the influx of workers. Businesses provide employment opportunities to the migratory labour force. On top of that, the government established an evaluation notice which includes NGOs such as The New Zealand Council of Trade Unions to monitor key activities, evaluate outcomes and ensuring equity and respect for migrant worker rights. The collaborations between this three sectors of society (government, businesses and civil societies), made sure the benefits of global trade between NZ and Pacific Island Countries are mutual.* The last example includes the consumer goods multinational, Unilever who has taken sign ificant strides in sustainable living regarding the 2001 hydrargyrum poisoning in Kodaikanal, India. NGOs such as Greenpeace were responsible of raising the issue to Unilever about scrap nut case containing mercury from a Unilever thermometer factory being sold to a scrap dealer located nearby. This was a breach of Unilevers procedures as workers health and then environment could be adversely affected. Unilever immediately close the plant and removed the glass scraps and the soil beneath the scrap back to the factory. After negotiations, the Indian and US governments were responsible for providing Unilever legal permits for transporting and recycling these hazardous materials in the United States. The commitment of Unilever in respectable choices combined with the cooperation of civil societies and government organizations help prevent a potential fatal disaster that defend the welfare of international labour.3. Joseph Stiglizs plans or conditions for making globalization work* Eliminating or reducing poverty through more foreign financial aid from advanced industrial countries to 0.7 percent of their GDP. Although I feel its a good idea for countries to redistribute wealth to deprived nations in order to help make globalization work, I also think that imposing a general level of GDP assistance without consideration of a countrys individual economic conditions is unfair. In recent years, we saw the EU struggling with the financial collapse of Greece and the spread of investor uncertainty throughout its member nations. In this case, I matte that a reduction of foreign aid to focus on own problems is understandable because if developing nations lose a big trade partner such as the EU due this matter, results will be worse off in the long run for both parties.* Stigliz also suggested that this foreign assistance should be given in forms of grants instead of loans as well as and an altered approach to conditionality. I agree with this Idea as we saw earlier with Jamaica, most developing countries face the same problem of debt. Jamaica was forced by the IMF and the World Bank to open up trade barriers which forced dependency on other countries and the destruction of local industries. In addition to that, most governmental spending as well as any foreign earnings from exports is used to service this debt and its ever-growing interest instead of investing in the countrys long term development. This severely limits Jamaica from restarting its own economy, making globalization benefits one sided.* Making trade fair is also on Stiglizs agenda. For example, removing trade tariffs of highly-developed countries before imposing them on disadvantaged countries. I agree upon this idea and my argument can be built again based on the collapse of Jamaicas agriculture industry. Potato, onion, carrot farmers have to directly compete with USA on a level playing field by removing trade barriers. However whether this situation is equal is questionable sin ce the USA still maintains its large agricultural subsidies to aid its own farmers forcing down prices of their own produce. This renders Jamaican farmers uncompetitive due to high borrowing costs and lack of governmental aid. I feel this is unfair as this undermines the living standards of developing countries such as Jamaica and advanced countries only benefit from the trade. Lowering trade tariffs in developed countries first allows developing countries a fair chance to adapt to changes in the economy.* Stigliz acknowledges the limitations of liberalization are important. This is shown with the upper-case letter Consensus based upon the concepts of liberalization forged between the World Bank, IMF and U.S Treasury which focused on the downscaling of government, deregulation, and privatization. Argentina who followed the Consensus initially had expansion of investment and export volumes. However what followed was a disappointing increase in unemployment, poverty, inequality, crim e and violence. I feel that the reason the consensus failed to revitalize the economy was that they employed a one-size-fits-all mentality. There was an overemphasis on GDP measures which was ineffective in measuring living standards, growth sustainability and equality. Thus these factors are ignored and contributed to the failure of the policy. Therefore, I count that understanding the local market, government and their individual economic problems apart from just imposing liberalization is essential in order to make globalization work.* Stigliz mentioned protecting the environment is a growing concern for globalization. The achiever of economic development in china and India increases the need for energy usage and the use of resources. I agree with Stiglizs notion that the worlds environment would not able to sustain this change. This year, there was a public outcry of Beijings air pollution when the Air Quality Index in the city saw a staggering reading of 755. As a comparison , any reading higher up 100 is considered hazardous for sensitive groups. This is attributed to the exponential increase in industrial activity in China. Although China benefits from an economic boom, I feel people must realize the cost of this endeavour to its citizens as it is devil-may-care to ignore the negative health effects it causes. Enforcing people to work under these conditions is no different to pickings advantage of unfair Labour consistently found within the poor working conditions in developing countries.