Key Terms :

Globalisation: The growing interdependence of countries worldwide through the increasing volume and
variety of cross-border transactions in goods and services and of international capital flows, and through
the more rapid and widespread diffusion of capital (IB definition).

Internationalism: The extension of economic activities across national boundaries. This is often referred
to as the stage before globalization.

Glocalisation: When TNCs adapt their products to suit the local market place e.g. McDonald in India
won't sell beef and in the Middle East they won't sell pork because of the religious beliefs of locals.

Grobalisation: The imperialistic ambitions of nations, corporations and organisations to impose

themselves on various geographic areas.

Nationalism: Refers to an ideology, a sentiment, a form of culture, or a social movement that focuses on
the nation.
Global Village: The term global village was popularised by Marshall McLuhan in 1962. He used it to refer
to how the world had been contracted into a village by electric technology.

Homogenisation: The process of everything become the same. Critics of globalisation say that
globalisation is making the world more homogenised.

Cultural Diversity: The increased variety of different cultures from around the world e.g. different foods,
music, film, etc.

Disneyfication, Mcdonaldisation, Toyotarisation: Various TNC names have been used to describe the
process of globalisation and that particular company taking over a large share of the global market
place.

Anti-capitalism: A broad term that is given to any challenge to capitalism.

The KOF index of Globalisation

The KOF index is a score each country is given out of 100, the higher the number the
more Globalised the country is considered to be.
The KOF Index of Globalization measures the three main dimensions of globalization:

economic

social
and political.

In addition to three indices measuring these dimensions, we calculate an overall index

of globalization and sub-indices referring to

actual economic flows

economic restrictions
data on information flows
data on personal contact
and data on cultural proximity.

How useful is the KOF index?

Although the KOF index can give us an idea of overall globalization, it has got some critics, particularly
about the accuracy and relevancy of the data. Criticisms include:
Measures like international letters per capita are very dated. Most people now use e-mail because it is
quicker and cheaper. Also trade in newspapers is slightly dated, more and more people now access
there news via the internet. Again trade in books is also becoming dated as more people buy e-books or
visit libraries and borrow.
Anything to do with trade can be hard to measure because many countries do not know the true size of
their informal economy (black market). Many black markets are actually involved in globalized trade e.g.
human trafficking, smuggling of wild animals and drugs.
Measuring foreign populations can be hard because of inaccurate record keeping and illegal immigrants.
Countries like the US have millions of unaccounted immigrants.
It is hard to calculate the true number of internet users. Many people don't have a home computer but
access the internet at their workplace or in internet cafes.
Some countries are small and don't have many embassies and instead rely on embassies and consulates
in neighbouring countries e.g. Monaco will use embassies in France, other countries share embassies
e.g. Commonwealth countries like New Zealand and Australia
Some countries choose to stay neutral and not join international organisations e.g. Switzerland - this
does not mean they are any less globalized.
Some countries have a large number of domestic tourists, but not many international. In large countries
domestic tourists can actually be very ethnically and culturally diverse, but this is not recognised.
(Greenfield Geography)
There is also an argument whether it is good or bad to be at the top or bottom of the globalisation list.
Some people may say it is good because there is cultural diversity and that you have access to people
and products from around the world. Others may argue that this is a bad thing because your culture is
being lost and that your country is possibly becoming more homogenised.
Core and Periphery
The world can be perceived as a core / periphery dichotomy where core countries are characterized by
high levels of development, a capacity at innovation and a convergence of trade flows. The core has a
level of dominance over the periphery which is reflected in trade and transportation. Accessibility is
higher within the elements of the core than within the periphery. Most of high level economic activities
and innovations are located at the core, with the periphery subjugated to those processes at various
levels. This pattern was particularly prevalent during the colonial era where the development of
transport systems in the developing world mainly favored the accessibility of core countries to the
resources and markets of the periphery, a situation that endured until the 1960s and 1970s. The semiperiphery has a higher level of autonomy and has been the object of significant improvements in

economic development (China, Brazil, Malaysia, etc.). The accessibility of the semi-periphery also
improved, permitting the exploitation of its comparative advantages in labor and resources.