UNIT I: Conceptualizing Globalisation
Duration: 4 Weeks
Introduction
lobalisation is a central concept in political science and international relations today. It refers to
G
the expanding web of interconnections among people, economies, and political institutions
across the world. These interconnections are facilitated by the movement of goods, services,
capital, people, technologies, and cultural ideas across borders. However, globalisation is not
merely an economic or technological phenomenon—it is deeply embedded in historical, political,
cultural, and ideological processes. The purpose of this unit is to critically examine the origins,
dimensions, and competing interpretations of globalisation to better understand its
transformative impact on the contemporary world.
1.1 – Is Globalisation New? Historical Perspectives
hile globalisation is often perceived as a recent development, especially due to rapid
W
advancements in technology and communication, a closer look at history reveals that the
phenomenon has deeper and older roots. The earliest forms of globalisation can be seen in
ancient civilisations through trade routes such as theSilk Road, which connected Asia, Europe,
and Africa and enabled not just the exchange of goods but also of cultures, religions, and
technologies.
he early modern phase of globalisation began with the European explorations of the 15th and
T
16th centuries. These voyages, driven by economic and religious motives, led to the
establishment of colonial empires and transoceanic trade networks. TheColumbian Exchange,
for instance, saw the movement of crops, animals, and diseases between the Old and New
Worlds. This period also witnessed the expansion of capitalism through mercantilism and the
Atlantic slave trade.
heIndustrial Revolutionin the 18th and 19th centuriesmarked a significant acceleration in
T
global integration. Innovations in transport and communication, such as the steam engine,
railways, and telegraph, reduced the time and cost of movement across vast distances.
European colonial powers extended their control over large parts of the Global South,
integrating these regions into a global economic system based on raw material extraction and
manufactured exports.
In thepost-World War II era, a new institutionalisedphase of globalisation began. Institutions
like theInternational Monetary Fund (IMF),WorldBank, andGeneral Agreement on Tariffs
nd Trade (GATT)were established to stabilise global economic relations. The 1990s saw the
a
rise ofneoliberal globalisation, emphasising freetrade, deregulation, and privatisation. This
period also witnessed the growing influence ofmultinationalcorporations, the spread of
information technology, and increased globalfinancialinterdependence.
hus, while theintensity, speed, and scopeof contemporaryglobalisation may be
T
unprecedented, its historical roots clearly indicate that globalisation is an evolving process with
multiple phases, not a sudden or entirely new phenomenon.
1.2 – Approaches to Understand Globalisation
lobalisation is a contested and multi-layered concept. Different theoretical approaches
G
interpret its nature, causes, and effects through distinct ideological and disciplinary lenses.
These approaches allow us to understand globalisation not as a neutral process, but as one
shaped by power relations and historical trajectories.
heliberal approachviews globalisation as apositiveand natural extension of market
T
capitalismand liberal democracy. Rooted in Enlightenmentideals, this perspective celebrates
the free movement of goods, services, and people as pathways to prosperity and peace. It
stresses the role ofinternational institutionssuchas theWTO, UN, and IMFin fostering
cooperation and stability. According to liberals, globalisation promotesinterdependence, which
in turn reduces the likelihood of conflict and enhances collective problem-solving.
In contrast, theMarxist or structuralist approachsees globalisation as an extension ofglobal
capitalismthat serves the interests of the bourgeoisie.This perspective highlightsclass
conflict,exploitation, andimperialismas centralfeatures of globalisation. It emphasises the
uneven relationship between thecore (developed)andperiphery (developing)nations, where
wealth and resources are systematically extracted from the Global South. Thinkers like
Immanuel Wallerstein(World Systems Theory) andDavidHarveyargue that globalisation
facilitates thespatial expansion of capitalto offsetcrises of overproduction and falling profits
in the capitalist core.
hepostcolonial approachcritically interrogatesglobalisation as a continuation of colonial
T
domination under the guise of development and modernisation. This perspective focuses on
epistemic violence,cultural imperialism, and themarginalisation of indigenous voices.
Scholars such asEdward SaidandGayatri Spivakchallengethe supposed neutrality of
globalisation discourses and reveal how they perpetuateWestern norms,languages, and
ideologiesat the expense of alternative ways of knowingand being.
hefeminist approachanalyses globalisation throughthe lens ofgendered power
T
structures. It emphasises the disproportionate burdenthat globalisation places on women,
particularly in developing countries. The feminisation of labour, characterised by low wages,
poor working conditions, and lack of security, is a critical concern. Feminist scholars also
xamineglobal care chains, wherein women from the Global South migrate to the North to
e
perform domestic and care work, leaving their own families behind.
inally, thecultural approachexplores how globalisationaffects identities, practices, and ways
F
of life. It questions whether globalisation leads tocultural homogenisationorhybridity. While
critics warn ofMcDonaldisationandWestern dominance,others highlightglocalisation,
where global ideas are reinterpreted locally. AnthropologistArjun Appaduraiintroduced the
concept of“scapes”(ethnoscapes, mediascapes, etc.)to map the complex cultural flows in a
globalised world.
ach of these approaches provides important insights and raises critical questions about who
E
benefits from globalisation, whose voices are heard, and what forms of power are reinforced or
challenged.
1.3 – The Globalisation Debate
he debate over globalisation reflects deep divisions over itsdesirability, inevitability, and
T
consequences. Three dominant schools of thought—hyperglobalists,sceptics, and
transformationalists—offer contrasting views on thenature and implications of globalisation.
yperglobalistsargue that globalisation is anirreversible,transformative forceleading to
H
the decline of the nation-state. According to them, global economic integration and technological
advancements have created aborderless worldin whichnational policies are subordinate to
global markets. They celebrate globalisation as a pathway to economic efficiency, technological
progress, and cosmopolitanism. Thinkers likeKenichiOhmaeargue that the state is becoming
obsolete, replaced by transnational corporations and global civil society.
ceptics, such asPaul Hirst and Grahame Thompson,challenge this optimism. They argue
S
that globalisation isneither new nor truly global,but rather a process limited to a few
industrialised regions. They emphasise the persistence ofnational borders, protectionism,
andunequal power dynamics. From this view, the stateremains central to economic
regulation and social welfare. Sceptics see the discourse of globalisation as a justification for
neoliberal policies that benefit a global elite while deepening inequality.
ransformationalists, including scholars likeAnthonyGiddensandDavid Held, occupy a
T
middle ground. They recognise that globalisation is reshaping the world, but argue that its
outcomes areopen-ended and contested. The state isnot disappearing but is being
restructured, sometimes strengthened and sometimesweakened depending on the context.
Transformationalists focus oncomplex causality,newglobal risks, and theinterplay of
global and local forces. They view globalisation asneither wholly positive nor negative, but as
a multifaceted and evolving phenomenon.
his debate highlights the need to study globalisationcritically and contextually, taking into
T
account its diverse forms and uneven impacts across societies.
Conclusion
lobalisation is far more than a buzzword—it is a deeply historical, political, and ideological
G
process that demands critical scrutiny. Far from being neutral, it is shaped by power relations
that determine who wins and who loses. Whether viewed as a driver of progress or as a tool of
exploitation, globalisation affects every aspect of life today—from jobs and migration to identity
and sovereignty. Through historical analysis, theoretical perspectives, and engagement with
scholarly debates, Unit I equips us with the tools to understand and interrogate the globalised
world we live in.
Perspective View on iew on
V Key Thinkers Example
State lobalisation
G
Hyperglobalist Declining ositive,
P Kenichi Ohmae T
ech corporations
inevitable beyond borders
Sceptical Dominant xaggerated,
E irst &
H egional blocs,
R
region-specific Thompson trade wars
ransformationalis R
T econfigurin ulti-dimensional A
M nthony ybrid institutions,
H
t g , contested Giddens, David digital activism
Held
