An evaluation of the consequences of globalisation of production for advanced industrial economies.

 

Rosemary Daly

0213144

 

To evaluate the consequences of the globalisation of production for advanced industrial economies it is necessary to look at the methods employed in production and the actors who govern this process. In evaluating the methods employed factors such as outsourcing and factor price equalisation are taken into account. By assessing the impact that MNCs have had on the production process an understanding of the rise in inequality of wages, among workers of the advanced industrial economies can be given. A period may also be emerging where there is a correlation of growth rates in particular amongst the G7 and it is necessary to note the possible effects of this might have.

 

            International specialisation is based on the existence of economies of scale. This means that producing on a large scale cuts the average unit cost of production. There was a time when trade in end products dominated international commerce, when goods in their entirety were produced in a single country. However the increasing dispersion of production across national frontiers is internationalising and globalizing products. Offshore sourcing and production has expanded rapidly in recent years. This has contributed to the growth of international trade as components move among countries. While trade in components and semi-finished products have a long history its importance in overall trade has risen dramatically (Arndt, 2001 p.219). This development has been facilitated by investment liberalisation and by cost cutting innovation in transportation and communications technology.

           

MNCs today penetrate a countries national consciousness and generate political action and ultimately policy response. MNCs exemplifies the era of transnationalism and increase the complex problems nearly all national governments face in devising economic policies (Krudel, 1991). They can be seen as extensions of the home country and bring a foreign influence. They can be seen as a rival, in that its claim on resources might otherwise go to some domestic element or they themselves might be seen as a resource that augments the production capacity of the host countries economy. Developed countries have experienced uneasiness with the economic outlook of MNCs, as they are incongruent with the host state and not sufficiently subordinate to state power. Facilitated by the increase in international trade and domestic economic liberalisation since the mid-1980s, world wide economies of scale have encouraged competition but also oligopolistic arrangements between and within MNCs (Pearson and Payaslian, 1999, p.239).

 

Since the 1970s more and more production has been destined for international trade. For example in 1994 world output grew by 5% while world trade increased by over 9% (Lairson and Skidmore, 1997, p.109). An important measure of the global activity of MNCs is foreign direct investment (FDI). In the 1960s FDI grew twice as fast as GDP and by the 1980s it was growing four times as fast as GDP. FDI has created the need for a new measure of international production that captures not just goods and services crossing borders but also goods and services produced abroad by foreign affiliates. It has been concluded that trillions of dollars of international production are not counted by traditional balance of payments accounting because no goods or service crosses a border.

 

                        Cross-border sourcing becomes attractive for firms if there exists a cost saving potential in production abroad. This disintegration of production is referred to as out-sourcing. In line with what has been written on this it can be assumed that the cost saving potential arises due to lower wages and tariff barriers rather than specialised effects or technology differences (Egger and Egger, 2001, p.2). This means that factor prices are not internationally equalised by final-goods traded. Outward processing by European Union firms to non-EU countries has increased dramatically since the demise of the Soviet Union. Between 1995 and 1997 outward processing in EU manufacturing grew by about 6.3% per annum, with outward processing growing about three times faster in importing industries than in exporting ones (Egger and Egger, 2001, p.10).

 

            In 1998 the global production of US firms was $1,266 trillion, for the same year US firms exported only $307 billion giving a ratio of more than 4:1 (Lairson and Skidmore, 1997, p.115). FDI allows the MNC the ability to operate a global enterprise and derive benefits from that operation. MNCs accept risks and undertake innovation that otherwise might not happen and therefore gain a competitive advantage. An institutional consequence of globalisation of production is the development of new and more complex forms for the organisation of production. The decline in the cost of communication, the growth of flexible manufacturing, the emergence of global networks of production, sourcing, finance and innovation have altered MNCs they are now global knowledge based producers. The further deepening of globalisation is a fundamental characteristic of the international political economy. MNCs use technological innovation to structure and restructure the process of production to minimise costs and maximise profits; a consequence of this type of production is that in doing so they shape the domestic and international context of employment.

 

            Numerous studies have documented evidence that show a rising inequality of earnings among workers with different levels of education in high-income countries (Miller, 2001). Some blame globalisation, particularly trade with less-developed countries. There has been vocal opposition particularly in the US for continued trade liberalisation; this is exemplified by the protests in Quebec and Seattle plus political pressure for greater trade protection. Rising inequality of earnings in the developed countries is an impact of globalisation and as previously outlined the existence of a large non-traded sector means that factor price equalisation may not occur. The rise of trade with LDCs increases imports, firms that were vertically integrated have moved their production process to cross border locations. Skill intensive remains but labour has moved through substituting imported intermediate imputs for those that were previously produced at home.

 

            Outsourcing low skill imputs has meant that the relative wages of unskilled labour has fallen in developed countries. As low skill activities are closed down people begin to find jobs in more skilled sectors, however those that have remained unskilled suffer a fall in wages in response to this reduction of demand, at the same time there is a rise in skilled relative wages in developed countries. The result of the globalisation of production for industrial economies is rising inequality in wages and the reduction of demand for unskilled labour, which in turn has led to unemployment.

 

            Another impact of the consequences of the globalisation of production is that a period maybe emerging in which broad movement in the economies of the industrialised countries maybe more closely linked. Early 2000 growth began to slow in the US, in months the growth rate of GDP began to simultaneously decline in many countries including the G7 group (Doyle and Faust, 2002, p.427). The links among the economies of the G7 has grown over the past decade, although the correlation of growth does not appear dramatically different now than it did in earlier years, the variability of their growth rates over this period has generally declined. A fall in variability does imply increased correlation of growth rates. Greater co-movement of GDP means that governments need to take a closer account of forecast for conditions abroad in formulating forecasts of their domestic economies.

 

            The links among the economies of the G-7 grew steadily over the final decades of the twentieth century. Since the 1970’s US share rose from about 5% to about 9% and each of the European G-7 nations have now reached shares of about 20% (Doyle and Faust, 2002, p.428). Openness to trade however may also bring changes that could decrease correlation. One of the primary benefits of trade according to economic theory is that it allows each country to specialise in areas of production in which it has a comparative advantage relative to its trading partners. With increased trade nations may come to specialise in certain types of production rely on imports to demand for other products. If different types of production are subject to different kinds of shocks, then trade-related specialisation could decrease growth correlation

 

 

The behaviour of trade, MNCs and the emergence of complex transnational production manufacturing have influenced the production process. MNCs remain largely ungovernable and global with no motivation for firms to return to the integrated methods of production that they used in the past, such a policy almost certainly would do more harm than good. There is a need for the industrial countries to adopt new monitoring procedures for in the absence of designing a draconian policy, industrialised countries need to implement measures that will give them greater control of the production process as globalisation is only set to deepen.

 

BIBLIOGRAPHY

 

Arndt, S. W. (2001). Globalisation of Production and the Value-Added Chain. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 12, 217-218.

 

Doyle, B and Faust, J. (2002). An Investigation of Co-movement among the Growth Rates of the G-7 Countries. Federal Reserve Bulletin, October, 427-437.

 

Feenstra, R. (1998). Integration of Trade and Disintegration of production in the Global Economy. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, 12, 4, 31-50.

 

Kurdrle, R. (1991), “The Several Faces of Multinational Corporation: Political Reaction and Policy Response” in International Political Economy, A. Reader, K. Stiles and T. Akaha (Des). Harper Collins.

 

Lairson, T. & Skidmore, D. (1997). International Political Economy: The Struggle for Power and Wealth. Harcourt Brace: NY.

 

Miller, T. (2001). Impact of globalisation on U.S. wage inequality: implications for policy. North American Journal of Economics and Finance, 12, 219-242.

 

Pearson, F and Payaslian, S. (1999). International Political Economy: Conflict and Co-operation in the Global System. McGraw-Hill: NY.

 

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1