See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/316939428

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Globalisation

Article · May 2017

CITATIONS READS
3 38,789

1 author:

Pannilage Upali
University of Ruhuna
71 PUBLICATIONS   57 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Gender pay gap among agricultural labourers in rural Sri Lanka View project

Transnational processes in an age of globalization: A sociological study of cultural impacts of globalization on rural Sri Lankan society. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Pannilage Upali on 15 May 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

An Introduction to the Theoretical Perspectives of Globalisation

Upali Pannilage

Department of Sociology, University of Ruhuna

pannila@[Link]

Abstract

The word globalization has become one of the most widely used terms in the contemporary
society in many of the academic fields. The multidisciplinary nature of the studies in
globalisation has provided opportunities to generate knowledge in many aspects of spheres
including economics, politics, media, geography and sociology. As results, there are number of
concepts, ideas and theories that have been formulated around it. The same notion of
multidisciplinary nature and as well as vast areas of coverage of the term, there is no uniformity
in explaining what the globalization is, among the scholars. Therefore, this paper has made an
attempt to summarise key definitions and theories of globalization in order to provide holistic,
but simplistic understanding about the globalization and related theories of it. The paper is
entirely based on secondary sources of data drawn from various scholars, and interpretations of
the Author more specifically from the sociological points of view. The paper has concluded with
that the globalization is a process which has been accelerated with attempted interventions of the
western world to expand the capitalist economy and as well as the capitalist culture.

Key Words: Capitalist; Global economy; Globalisation; Theory

Introduction

Anthony. Giddens (2009:126) wrote that “thirty years ago, the term globalization was relatively
unknown, but today it seems to be on the tip of everyone's tongue. Globalization refers to the fact
that we all increasingly live in one world, so that individuals, groups and nations become ever
more interdependent”. Accordingly, the term globalization was hardly used, either in the
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

academic literature or in everyday language before the 1980s. However, today we see abundance
in its usage academically and in everyday life. Although, the studies in globalization is being
extensively used in the social science disciplines of economics and to some extend in
international relations and geography, academic work on the globalization in other social
sciences disciplines including sociology is not adequate as the term and theories has been simply
taken from economics or international relations. Therefore, the ultimate objective of this paper is
to take a sociological approach to the study of globalization. The paper is based on the secondary
data drawn from literatures which define and explain the tem globalization theoretically and as
well as conceptually. The initial part of the paper has been allocated to define the term
globalization from scholarly work and then it has moved in to the theoretical perspectives of
globalization as explained by prominent scholars in the field of social sciences. The later part of
the paper has examined the related theories of globalization. Finally, conclusions have been to
drawn based on the analysis.

What is Globalisation?

The word globalization has many specific uses in contemporary discussions. It is frequently used
as an economic term to denote the acceleration of the interconnections in the global economy in
the last few decades, and the related phenomenon of the rise of both relatively open international
financial markets and global corporations (Barnett and Cavanagh, 1994). Khor, (2002) argued
that economic globalization is not a new process, for over the past five centuries firms in the
economically advanced countries have increasingly extended their outreach through trade and
production activities (intensified in the colonial period) to territories all over the world. As
explained by Friedman (1999), the driving idea behind globalization is free-market capitalism—
the more you let market forces rule and the more you open your economy to free trade and
competition, the more efficient and flourishing your economy will be. Youngs (2007:4)
highlighted that the notions of an indirect persistence of United Nations of America’s (USA)
hegemony are most closely linked to the development of globalization perspectives. Rappa
(2004:176) argued that the political economy of the USA has a profound financial, social,
cultural and political influence on the process of globalization throughout the world. “A strong
claim is that the most powerful multilateral institutions, in terms of the resources at their
command, are controlled by the donor countries (and most probably the USA)” (Morten &
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Desmond, 2014:2). Much of earlier research in this field addressed the impact of trade
liberalisation on aggregate welfare in developing nations or the relationship between trade
liberalisation and poverty (McCorriston et al., 2013). Rosenau (2003) defined globalisation as
the tensions between opposites that presently underline the course of events and the development
or decline of institutions.

Dalby (2007) mentioned that globalization is means to the large scale changes in the social
economic and political life. Hence, in one hand, globalization means to a process of changes in
various aspects of the society. Turner (2011), argued that consequence of globalization, modern
societies are predominantly multi- cultural and consequently they are also multi-faith societies.

There is much advanced role in the process of promoting globalisation by the multinational and
transnational companies and global governing mechanisms. During the Clinton presidency1 in
USA, globalization accelerated and expanded so aggressively that voices of concern began to
coalesce and organize throughout the world, by articulating popular movements as in Seattle and
elsewhere (Gill, 2000; Halliday, 2000; Kaldor, 2000; Scholte, 2000). The impact of
Reaganomics (during the Ronald Regan2 presidency in USA) on cultural practices was perhaps
even more extensive than in the economic and financial fields. In Reagan’s years, the robust
nexus between politics, economics, military and the expansion of mass consumerism was
amplified through the media industry (Barber, 2008; Moffitt, 1987). These definitions highlight
the close association of the term globalisation with the disciplines of economics and international
relations. The role played by the USA hegemony in promoting globalisation in line with the
capitalist economic system is clearly evidenced from the literatures that defined and explain the
globalisation

Theoretical Perspectives of Globalisation

The literature on scholarly work about globalization suggests that there is no any single theory or
definition on globalization. It has become a multidisciplinary, multidimensional phenomenon in

1
Bill Clinton (1946- ), the 42nd President of USA, served in office from 1993 to 2001.
2
Ronald Reagan (1911-2004) the 40th President of USA served office 1981 to 1989.
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

the academic discourses of 21st century. In this scenario, the Author of this paper has made an
attempt to summarize major theoretical perspectives of globalization in order to understand it
from wider, but simplistic means. This section of the paper has briefly summarized key
theoretical arguments on globalization.

Prominent scholarly arguments on globalization

Since there are variety of concepts and arguments on the globalization, it is necessary to
understand key theoretical perspectives from the prominent scholars that have contributed to the
globalization literature. There, the work on Social imaginary, Risk society, Network society,
Time-space distanciation, Glocalisation and McDonalisation can be considered as most
significant contributions.

Considerable work towards cultural aspects of globalization has been done by Arjun Appadurai.
His work which has conceptualized under the theme of “Social Imaginary” contributed
considerably in the theorizing globalization. Appadurai (1997) defined globalisation
characterised by two forces, mass migration and electronic mediation. Primarily focusing on
cultural globalization, Appadurai argued that the complexity of global economy has to do with
certain fundamental disjunctures between economy, culture, and policies that we can understand
through cultural flows. He further discusses the significance of modernity as central to a new
system of global culture, and considers the roll of imagination as a social practice. The imaginary
is composed of five dimensions of global cultural flow namely (a) Ethnoscapes (b)Mediascapes
(c) Technoscape (d) Financescapes (e) Ideoscapes. Accordingly, Ethnoscape is meaning to the
migration of people across cultures and borders. Technoscapes bring about new types on cultural
interactions and exchanges through the power of technology. Financecaps meaning to that
technology which is very closely tied with the economy, which is constantly in flux and despite
the efforts to manipulate, is wildly unpredictable. Mediascapes and ideoscapes, deal with the
national and international creation and dissemination of information and images.

Ulrik Beck introduced the theoretical perspective under the concept of “Risk Society” His work
has been extensively explained in his publication on Risk Society: Toward a New Modernity first
published in German in 1986 and translated into English in 1992. Beck, concentrated on the
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

political, economic and social globalisation. Beck’s theoretical frame comprises three inter-
related components: risk, individualization, and reflexive modernization. Beck sees a dynamic
that is driven by an increase in risks and in the ability of science to detect increasingly minute
risks, leading to a fundamental re-ordering of social positions in society, and to a transformation
in the cultural meanings of risk. Beck’s main arguments include that there has been a change
from the logic of wealth distribution in a society of scarcity to the logic of risk distribution in late
modernity. Society is confronted with socially created risks that endanger the survival of
humankind; leading institutions (economic, political, legal, and administrative) not only produce
those risks but also make the resulting risks “socially non- existent” (Beck, 1992).

Manuel Castells significant contribution towards globalization theory has been named as
“Network Society”. Castells (1996) explained that globalisation is a shift emphasis from post-
industrialism to informationalism. He defined globalisation as the emergence of
informationalism is the new material, technological basis of economic activity and social
organisation. Manuel Castells’ groundbreaking trilogy, The Rise of the Network Society (1996,
1997, 1998), exemplifies a ‘technologistic’ approach to globalization. While his theory shares
with world-system and global capitalism approaches an analysis of the capitalist system and its
dynamics, it is not the logic of capitalist development but that of technological change that is
seen to exercise underlying causal determination in the myriad of processes referred to as
globalization ( Robinson 2008:132).

Anthony Giddens introduced the framework on ‘Time-space distanciation’. According to

Giddens, social life consists of interactions that are face-to-face or remote. Time-space
distanciation describes the process whereby remote interaction has become an increasingly
significant feature of human life, and through which social systems that were previously
distinctive have become connected and interdependent. Giddens (1990, 1999, 2009) defined
globalisation as the intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in
such a way that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice
versa. Giddens too primarily focused on the political, social and economic globalisation. He
constructs four dimensions of modernity (a) capitalism (b) surveillance (c) military order ( d)
industrialism.
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Roland Robertson (1990, 1992, 1997) contributed to the globalization debate through his work
on glocalisation which emphasised on the cultural globalisation. Accordingly, globalisation was
defined as the compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as
a whole. Glocalization is means to a case in which a global product is transformed into another
shape in order to meet the needs of local consumers. This is a phenomenon which is alternative
to Americanization. Robertson argued on the establishment of cultural, social, and
phenomenological linkages between the self, the national society, the international system of
societies and humanity.

George Ritzer, introduced the concept of McDonaldization which is the process of

rationalization, albeit taken to extreme levels. The process of McDonaldization takes a task and
breaks it down into smaller tasks. This is repeated until all tasks have been broken down to the
smallest possible level. He argued that there are four main dimensions of McDonalisation
namely efficiency, calculability, predictability and control. Efficiency is meaning to the optimum
method of completing a task. This is the rational determination of the best mode of production
which individuality is not allowed. Calculability means to the assessment of outcomes based on
quantifiable rather than subjective criteria. Predictability is meaning to the production process
which is organized to guarantee uniformity of product and standardized outcomes. All shopping
malls begin to look the same and all highway exits have the same assortment of businesses.
Control is the substitution of more predictable non-human labour for human labour, either
through automation or the deskilling of the work force ( Ritzer, 1996).

Three Tendencies in Globalisation Theories

Some scholars ( eg. Held et al 1999; Holton 2005, Martel 2010) have identified three
perspectives in globalisation theory as Hyper-globalists, Sceptics and Transformationalists.
These perspectives can be summarised as follows.
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Table.1 Conceptualizing globalization: three tendencies

Hyper-globalizers Sceptics Transformationalists

(Ohrnae 1990, 1995; (Boyer & Drache (Sassen 1991;
Albrow 1997) 1996; Hirst 1997; Rosenau,1997)
Hirst & Thompson
,1999)
What's new? A global age Trading blocs, weaker Historically
geo-governance than unprecedented
in earlier periods levels of global inter
connectedness
Dominant features? Global capitalism, World less Thick' (intensive and
global governance, interdependent than in extensive)
global civil society 1890s globalisation
Power of national Declining or eroding Reinforced or Reconstituted.
governments? enhanced restructured
Driving forces of Capitalism and Governments and Combined forces of
globalisation technology markets modernity
Pattern of Erosion of old Increased New architecture of
stratification? hierarchies marginalization of world order
south
Dominant motif? McDonald's, National interest Transformation of
Madonna, etc. political community
Conceptualization of A reordering of the Internationalization Reordering of inter-
globalization? framework of human and regionalisation regional relations and
action action at a distance
Historical trajectory? Global civilization Regional blocs/ clash Indeterminate: global
of civilisations integration and
fragmentation
Summary argument The end of the nation- Internationalization Globalization
state depends on transferring
government government power and
acquiescence and world
support

Source: Held e t al 1999, cited in Giddens, 2009:137

Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

The “Hyper-globalists”, while recognizing importance of previous influences of globalisation,

identify an historical juncture after which contemporary globalisation emerged. As per the hyper-
globalist analysis, the previous eras are sometimes described as pre-globalisation or as periods of
internationalisation. According to the hyper-globalists, contemporary globalization is
fundamentally associated with the erosion of the power and authority of the nation-state. They
further argued that national economies are much less significant or even no longer existent
because of the role played by the capital mobility, multinational corporations and economic
interdependency. Because of reduced political restrictions on the movement of money and
technological change in the form of the computerisation of financial transactions, large amounts
of money can be moved almost instantaneously with little to constrain it within national
boundaries. Many corporations are seen now to be multinational rather than national, in their
ownership and internationally distributed production facilities, workforces and consumers. Such
corporations that often get mentioned include Coca-Cola and McDonalds, or media
multinationals such as News Corporation that have stakes in many forms of media, from
newspapers to book publishing, the internet and Television, and across different areas of the
globe (Thompson 1995; Edward & McChesney, 2004).

The “Sceptics” argue that internationalization and global connections are by no means novel
phenomena. By placing cultural, economic, political, social and technological developments on
an evolutionary time-line, the sceptics argue that globalisation has existed for centuries and that
the sum of recent developments only changes the scale and scope of globalization and not the
intrinsic characteristics of the phenomenon itself. They are concerned with the abstract nature of
globalist perspectives, which seem to be thin on empirical substantiation and make sweeping
claims about processes as if they affect all areas of the world evenly and with the same
responses. They see evidence of the continuing role of nation-states, both within their own
boundaries and as agents of the transnational processes of globalisation, through which they
maintain as much as lose power. In the cases of the core, for instance in North America
and Europe, states continue to be very powerful (Martell, 2010). The national identities have a
history and a hold on popular imagination that global identities cannot replace, evolving rather
than being swept away, and there may even be evidence of a resurgence of nationalism as old
nations come under challenge but from strongly held smaller nationalisms for instance, former
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Yugoslavia, Sri Lanka and Canada as much as from transnationalism (Smith 1990; Kennedy &
Danks, 2001).

The “Transformationalists” are critical of hyper-globalism and wishes to formulate a more

sophisticated picture but feels, contrary to scepticism, that globalisation is changing the world...
The transformationalists argue that globalization is the major force underlying the rapid,
widespread social, political and economic changes that are currently reshaping and reconstituting
modern societies and the world order. The nation-state still has an important, albeit transformed
role. The transformationalist analysis claims to either rescue globalist arguments (Held et al
1999) or to have a more sophisticated advance on sceptic arguments (Hay & Marsh 2000). As
such, it directs readers away from sceptical viewpoints to either a modified globalism or what is
said to be a more sophisticated scepticism, the latter of which is couched in terms which accept a
form of globalisation as an actuality. Globalisation involves profound transformative change and
is a central driving force behind changes reshaping the world. There are not clear distinctions
between the domestic and the international in economic, social and political processes. For
instance, aspects of national culture such as media, film, religion, food, fashion and music are so
infused with inputs from international sources that national culture is no longer separate from the
international. This is a transformatory driving force because this globalisation changes peoples’
life experiences.

Associated theories of globalisation

While the globalisation stands itself as a theory, there are three distinct theories which have close
links with the globalisation. Hence there is a need to understand those related theories as well, in
order to understand the phenomenon on globalisation and its various dimensions more clearly
and deeply. Such related theories of globalisation include the World culture theory, World
system theory and World polity theory.

The World-System Theory

Immanuel Wallerstein develops a theoretical framework to understand the historical changes

involved in the rise of the modern world. Accordingly, the modern world system, essentially
capitalist in nature, followed the crisis of the feudal system and helps explain the rise of Western
Europe to world supremacy between 1450 and 1670. According to Wallerstein, his theory makes
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

possible a comprehensive understanding of the external and internal manifestations of the

modernization process during this period and makes possible analytically sound comparisons
between different parts of the world.

Wallerstein’s main arguments about how this world-system emerged were outlined in a three-
volume work, The Modem World-System (1974; 1980; 1989), which sets out his macro
sociological perspective. The origins of the modern world-system lie in sixteenth- and
seventeenth-century Europe, where colonialism enabled countries like Britain, Holland and
France to exploit the resources of the countries they colonized. This allowed them to accumulate
capital which was ploughed back into the economy; thus driving forward production even
further. This global division of labour created a group of rich countries, but also impoverished
many others, thus preventing their development. Wallerstein argues that the process produced a
world-system made up of a core, a semi-periphery and a periphery. And although it is clearly
possible for individual countries to move 'up' into the core - as have some newly industrialized
societies - or to drop 'down' into the semi-periphery and periphery; the structure of the modern
world-system remains constant.( Giddens, 2009: 128).

Wallerstein (1998) mentioned that "a world-system is a social system, one that has boundaries,
structures, member groups, rules of legitimation, and coherence. Its life is made up of the
conflicting forces which hold it together by tension and tear it apart as each group seeks eternally
to remold it to its advantage. It has the characteristics of an organism, in that is has a lifespan
over which its characteristics change in some respects and remain stable in others…Life within it
is largely self-contained, and the dynamics of its development are largely internal".

World-systems theory is a multidisciplinary, macro-scale approach to world history and social

change that stresses that the world-system should be the primary unit of social analysis. Core
countries focus on higher skill, capital-intensive production, and the rest of the world focuses on
low-skill, labor-intensive production and extraction of raw materials. This constantly reinforces
the dominance of the core countries. The modern world-system has its origin in the European
world-economy created in the late-fifteenth and early-sixteenth century, but only consolidated in
its current form by the mid-seventeenth century. The crisis of feudalism created strong
motivation to seek new markets and resources; technology gave Europeans a solid base for
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

exploration. Parts of Western Europe exploited initially small differences, via specialization in
activities central to world commerce, to ultimately large advantage (Wallerstein, 1974).

The modern world-system is a world-economy: it is "larger than any juridically defined political
unit" and "the basic linkage between its parts is economic". It is a capitalist world-economy
because the accumulation of private capital, through exploitation in production and sale for profit
in a market, is its driving force; it is "a system that operates on the primacy of the endless
accumulation of capital via the eventual commodification of everything" (Wallerstein, 1998).

There has also been much dispute about the historical origins of the notion of globalization, but it
is clear that at least in sociology the early driving force in the development of globalization
theories was dissatisfaction with the economic assumptions of world systems theory, especially
as this approach had been constructed by Wallerstein and his school. In economic terms,
globalization had often been treated as simply another phase of the emergence of a capitalist
world system, the principal causal mechanisms of which were the economic requirements of
global trade and transnational corporations. Sociological theories of globalisation attempted to
establish the independent development of social and cultural forces contributing to the
emergence of the world as a single place (Turner, 2011:5).

Through this theory, Wallerstein attempts to explain why modernization had such wide-ranging
and different effects on the world. He shows how political and economic conditions after the
breakdown of feudalism transformed northwestern Europe into the predominant commercial and
political power. The geographic expansion of the capitalist world economy altered political
systems and labor conditions wherever it was able to penetrate. Although the functioning of the
world economy appears to create increasingly larger disparities between the various types of
economies, the relationship between the core and its periphery and semi-periphery remains
relative, not constant. Technological advantages, for example, could result in an expansion of the
world economy overall, and precipitate changes in some peripheral or semi-peripheral areas.
However, Wallerstein asserts that an analysis of the history of the capitalist world system shows
that it has brought about a skewed development in which economic and social disparities
between sections of the world economy have increased rather than provided prosperity for all.

The World Polity Theory

Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

World polity theory was developed mainly by John W. Meyer as an analytical frame for
interpreting global relations, structures, and practices. It was developed partly in response to the
application of world systems theory. The theory views the world system as a social system with a
cultural framework called world polity, which encompasses and influences the actors, such as
nations, international organizations, and individuals under it. The World polity theory views the
primary component of the world society as “world polity,” which provides a set of cultural
norms or directions in which the actors of the world society follow in dealing with problems and
general procedures. In contrast to other theories such as neo-realism or liberalism, the theory
considers other actors such as the states and institutions to be under the influence of global
norms. The world polity contains no single actor or institution defining what is valuable for the
world as a whole. "Instead of a central actor, the culture of world society allocates responsible
and authoritative actor hood to nation-states" (Meyer et al. 1997).

World polity analysis initially revolved around examining inter-state relations. Simultaneously in
the 1970s and 1980s, a significant amount of work was done on international education
environment. However, in the 1980s and 1990s due to the noticeable influence of globalization
on world culture, the direction of the study shifted towards analyzing the transnational social
movement that may amount to a global polity while at the same time attempting to better
understand how global polity ideas are implemented through global actors.

Their authority is rooted in a world culture: a set of universally applicable models that define
who are legitimate actors in world society, what goals they can pursue and how they can pursue
them. While world polity models define sovereign states as key actors, enabling authorities to
construct collective goals and devise the means or programs to produce them, state officials are
not the only ones engaged in such authoritative creation of value (Meyer, 1980).

The World Culture Theory

World culture theory is a label for a particular interpretation of globalization that focuses on the
way in which participants in the process become conscious of and give meaning to living in the
world as a single place. In this account, globalization "refers both to the compression of the
world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a whole"; in other words, it covers
the acceleration in concrete global interdependence and in consciousness of the global whole
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

(Robertson 1997: 8). It involves the crystallization of four main components of the "global-
human circumstance": societies (or nation-states), the system of societies, individuals (selves),
and humankind; this takes the form of processes of, respectively, societalization,
internationalization, individuation, and generalization of consciousness about humankind
(Robertson, 1992).

Globalization standardizes the contents of the cultures of the world into one single culture spread
by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the European Community and the World
Trade Organisation in tandem at the expense of United Nations and its specialized agencies like
UNESCO, UNICEF, UNDP, and the nation-states. Each state composed an integral cultural
pattern. It adopted one or more official languages, sometimes established official religions, and
introduced uniform educational systems. As a result, cultures took on their own unique
characteristics based on the unit of nation. The recent process of globalization, however, is
challenging this situation.

The globalization process poses a challenge as well to the ethnic culture contained within each
nation. It frequently invades and transforms the forms of indigenous culture which were
established by ethnic groups and nations. When successful, the cultural contact of
internationalization promotes mutual understanding among discrete nation-states and ethnic
groups, and while certain transformations in each culture might coincidentally result, the process
of internationalization itself is possible without such transformations. The process of
globalization, however, tends to be incompatible with the maintenance of indigenous cultures.
Cultural globalization will share certain characteristics of other globalization processes, namely
the weakening or disappearance of borders between nations, societies, and ethnic groups, and
simultaneous unfolding of events on a global scale. And it must be added that the principle
according to which these things will unfold is that of competition in a free market.

Conclusion

The analysis of literature on globalization highlighted that the term globalization has diverse
meaning from economic points of view to the socio cultural and as well as to the political
dimensions. As per the historical point of view, especially with economic and trade aspects, the
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

globalization process has been there in the society for long being. However, it has been
accelerated during the second half of the 20th century with the attempted interventions of the
western countries as they tried to expand their economy and the culture throughout the world
through various means. This discussion and analysis pave the way to understand that there are
variety of concepts, terms and theories which has been associated with the globalization. In
conclusion, the globalization is a social change process which has spread all most all the aspects
of society due to the deliberate attempt of the west to promote their economy and culture which
capitalist in nature. Although, globalization has been widely discussed and studied from the
economic point of view, sociological analysis of globalization highlights the capacity of those
theories to study the human behaviours of the society.

Reference

Appadurai, A. (1997). Modernity at large: Cultural dimensions of globalization. Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press.

Barber, R. B. (2008). Con$umed : How Markets Corrupt Children, Infantilize Adults,

and Swallow Citizens Whole. New York: W.W. Norton & Company.

Barnett,R.J and Cavanagh,J.,(1994).Global Dreams: Imperial Corporations and the new World
Order, New York, Simon & Schuster

Beck, U.,( 1992). The risk society. Toward a new modernity. London, sage

Castells, M.( 1996). The rise of the network society. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.

Dalby, S., (2007). Globalisation, Geography and Environmental Security. In

Globalisation theory and practice (eds) Eleonore Kofman and Gillian Youngs,
Continuum, London- New York.

Edward, S. H., and McChesney, R, W., (2004). The Global Media: The New Missionaries of
Corporate Capitalism. Continuum, London and New York

Friedman,L. T., ( 1999) The Lexus and the Olive Tree. Anchor Books, New York

Giddens, A., (2009) Sociology (sixth edition), Polity Press, UK and USA
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Gill, S., (2000). Toward a Postmodern Prince? The Battle in Seattle as a Moment in the New
Politics of Globalisation. Millennium Journal of International Studies, 29(1) 131-140.

Halliday, F., (2000). Getting Real About Seattle. Millennium - Journal of International
Studies, 29(1) 123-129.

Hay, C., and Marsh, D., (2000). Introduction: Demystifying Globalisation’ in Demystifying
Globalisation, edited by Colin Hay and David Marsh, Basingstoke: Palgrave.

Held, D., McGrew A., Goldblatt, D., & Perraton, J., (1999), Global Transformations: politics,
economics and culture. Cambridge: Polity Press.

Holton, R., (2005), Making Globalisation. New York, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

Kaldor, M., (2000). Civilising' Globalisation? The Implications of the `Battle in Seattle’.
Millennium - Journal of International Studies, 29(1) 105-114.

Khor, M. (2002). Globalisation and the South: Some Critical Issues, Third World Network,
Malaysia.
Kennedy, P. and Danks, C. J.,( eds). (2001), Globalization and National Identities: Crisis
or Opportunity?. London: Palgrave.

Martell, L., ( 2010) The Sociology of Globalisation. Cambridge Polity Press, USA

McCorriston, S., Hemming, D. J., Lamontagne-Godwin, J. D., Osborn, J., Parr, M. J.,
& Roberts, P. D. (2013). What is the evidence of the impact of agricultural trade liberalisation
on food security in developing countries? A systematic review. London: EPPI-Centre, Social
Science Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London.

Moffitt.M., (1987). Shocks, Deadlocks, and Scorched Earth: Reaganomics and the Decline
of U.S. Hegemony. World Policy Journal, 4(4) 553-582.

Morten Boas and Desmond McNeill ( ed) ( 2014). Global Institutions and Development:
Framing the World. Routledge, London, UK

Meyer, John W., John Boli, George M. Thomas, and Francisco O. Ramirez. (1997), "World
Society and the Nation-State." American Journal of Sociology 103(1): 144-181.
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Meyer, John W. (1980). "The World Polity and the Authority of the Nation-State." Pp. 109-137
in A. Bergesen (ed.), Studies of the Modern World-System. New York: Academic Press.

Rappa.L. A., (2004). Globalisation: An Asian Perspective on Modernity and Politics in America.
Marshall Cavendish, Singapoor

Ritzer, G., (1996). The McDonaldization of Society: An Investigation into the

Changing Character of Contemporary Society. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Pine Forge Press.

Robertson, R.(1992). Globalisation: Social Theory and Global Culture. London: Sage.

Robertson, R.(1997). Glocalisation: Time-space and homogeneity-heterogeneity. In M.

Featherstone, S. Lash & R. Robertson ( Eds.), Global modernities ( pp 25-44) Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.

Robinson, W. I. (2008). Theories of Globalization, in The Blackwell Companion to Globalization

(ed G. Ritzer), Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Oxford, UK.

Rosenau, J.,.(2003). Distant proximities: Dynamics beyond globalization. Princeton, NJ:

Princeton University Press.

Scholte, J.A. (2000). Globalisation : A Critical Introduction. New York, St, Martin’s Press

Smith, A.D.,( 1990). Towards a Global Culture?, Theory, Culture & Society. London,Sage

Tomlinson, J., ( 1999) Globalization & Culture. Cambridge. Polity Press

Turner, B.. S., (2011). Religion and Modern Society: Citizenship, Secularisation and the state,
Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, UK

Wallerstein, I., (1998). Utopistics: Or, Historical Choices of the Twenty-First Century. New
York: The New Press.

Wallerstein,I., (1989). The Modern World-System III: The Second Era of Great Expansion of the
Capitalist World Economy. New York: Academic Press.

Wallerstein, I., ( 1974). The Modern World System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the
European World Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press.
Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences Vol VII
2017

Youngs, G., ( 2007). International Relations as we Enter the Twenty- first Century. In Kofman
Eleonore and Youngs Gillian ( Ed) Globalisation: Theory and Practice ( second edition),
Continuum, New York, USA.

View publication stats