Globalization and Its Consequences - Free Essay Example

Introduction

International integration and cooperation amongst nations have created more benefits than harm, but small-scale agricultural producers have a different tale. Peasant farmers feel disadvantaged in the face of international corporations and manufacturers of agricultural goods who penetrate global barriers to conduct business in local markets. These peasants depend on the subsistence production of agricultural products that they sell to local markets (Ebie 39). Still, with the advent of globalization, other producers from overseas countries come to dominate the local scene hence forcing peasant farmers out of the market. Inequalities have been a reality of human existence historically, and they disadvantage the less powerful parties. Consequently, it would be wise to consider the negative impacts of globalization on economic, political, and social alignments in the world. This paper discusses the negative effect of globalization on peasant farmers, how it destroys their livelihood, and, subsequently, their economic and social well-being.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Globalization and Agriculture

Janssens, Maddux, and Nguyen define globalization as the practices characterized by increased cooperation among countries to handle emerging global issues and deal with challenges effectively and sustainably (2019). In most cases, global interaction and cooperation are beneficial to either country as there is greater availability of goods and services. The same transcends technological advancement and cultural integration through socialization and networking. To the peasants involved in agriculture, globalization, in most cases, acts against their favor.

Gebala stated that globalization affects farmers’ lives in more than one aspect (1). To the underdeveloped and developing nations, the farmers in these regions are on the verge of being subjected to tough international competition that will cripple their production. Local farmers have expressed the impact globalization has had on them. Bill Christison said, “Globalization means that the number of farms in the United States that gross between 50,000 and 249,999 (18.2%) of the farms now only represents 21.1% of the total market value. 73.6% of the nation's farms share 6.8% of the market value of agricultural products sold while 7.2% of the farms receive 72.1% of the market value of products sold” (Christison 1). These numbers show that the process of peasant farmers being overrun has drastically begun.

The phenomenon has had its disadvantages, especially regarding the creation and promotion of domination globally. Peasant farmers need to access banking services (Gebala 3). The same farmers also need to access other support services such as an efficient transportation system to make products reach time. Given that they are at a disadvantage in competing with global firms practicing agriculture, these peasant farmers usually run out of options and quit the industry. Kym Anderson reports that the percentage of agricultural farm exports continues to diminish as the years move on. With data from 1961 to 2004, Anderson stated that the European Union zone reduced by approximately 40% (3).

Consequences of Globalization on Agriculture. As technological advancements come about within farming and agricultural work, peasant farmers are not able to continue to compete with their competition. A peasant farmer who produces a particular product with a high demand might lack the necessary resources to make the products available to the appropriate consumers. Given that peasant farmers mostly cultivate the land for subsistence use, the surplus they usually get goes a long way towards uplifting their economic obligations (Cikic & Marica 310). The farmers sell surplus production and get to finance their social expenditures and lifestyles. However, the advent of international agriculturalists in their local markets makes it impossible for peasant farmers to sell their goods.

Global competition in the agricultural sector has immensely increased in the recent past (Jambor & Suresh 2). However, despite this competition, food production continues to drop as food insecurity keeps rising, and the primary cause of this problem is global competition in the food industry. Jambor and Suresh report that there has been a shift in food production (3). According to their analysis, the ‘normal’ surplus of the developing countries dwindled, and these nations had to start importing food (3). Conversely, developed nations upgraded their stance from importers to exporters of agricultural products.

Countries with low incomes are not able to expand themselves to keep up with those who have the money to research and expand. “Nowhere is this more dramatic than in Africa, which has suffered from the increasingly efficient production of first oil palm, then cocoa, and now coffee from Asian countries that have been spending on research” (fao.org). Africa is put on the downside from Asian regions from their ability to continually advance themselves, due to their supply of money that they can use. African peasant farmers then lose their livelihood as their ability to produce and advance diminishes.

Technological advancements in highly developed countries make it easier to produce food. New inventions are put in place that yield high-quality products, and at the same time, lessen the labor input necessary to produce the desired harvest (Milone & Flaminia 5). The setback to this, however, comes into play when the peasant farmers in developed or less developed countries cannot be able to afford such new technologies and modern agricultural inputs (Ramachandran 15). A consequence to the peasant, therefore, is evident when financially stable international firms get to procure the new designs and structure of farm mechanization and inputs to get high-quality yields.

On the other hand, international farmers aim for large-scale production while most peasant farmers work for subsistence production. With the advancements in labor, the wealthier nations, can surpass their competition with the peasant farmers because the peasant farmers cannot compete with the massive level of production. The latter farmers do not have the means or resources to supply the consumer with their desired goods. Consequently, seeking out greater efficiency of mass production opens an opportunity for another producer who can produce the goods at a more efficient rate, to be able to meet the needs of the consumer.

Cost reduction is a by-product of technological advancement. However, countries that cannot embrace new technologies stand at a disadvantage in competing with international companies whose countries have advanced technologies. Due to this fact, the ability to lower the costs of production in one region leads to low products in the markets. Given that globalization entails open markets to all producers, those farmers who produce cheaply still get to bring their produce to the market at reduced prices. Peasant farmers in these local markets cannot sell at the same price compared to the international agricultural firms who produce with greater efficiency and reduced costs.

Anderson stated that alternative land use is a crucial factor in allocating land for food production (2). In the article, “Globalization’s effects on world agricultural trade, 1960 – 2050,” Kym Anderson explained that the land has other valuable resources that can be exploited in the place of farming. As people socialize and travel through countries, they spread new ways of life and economic activities. Most local people, peasant farmers, in that case, got to assimilate to the new ways of living and found themselves other economic activities other than farming. Suffice it to say, in this one instance, the livelihood of peasant farmers is not directly affected but somewhat economically impacted given the intermittent period the farmers have to wait before the new ventures eventually pan out.

Recommendations

Underdeveloped and developing countries should invest more in research and dissemination of new technology. These nations should spend surmountable investment in research to find alternative means of food production that will not be costly to the farmers. Developed countries should also help these other countries find equilibrium in food security by providing financial and expertise.

Infrastructural development should also be a point of concern for quickening access to farm produce to the market. Research indicates that most commercial millers prefer to buy grains from far lands instead of local farmers (Muckey 16). This fact transcends the importance of infrastructure as the cost of bringing the farm produce to the millers, if locally procured, outweighs the cost of purchasing the same quantity from commercial growers who have adequate means of transportation.

The states should monitor the spread of immigrants into developed nations. The flow of human resources from developing countries to developed countries affects labor pricing to the recipient nation (17). Moreover, the movement of peasant farmers from their local environments influences the quantity of subsistence food production in the parent country negatively.

In the same respect, almost 63% of the laborers are attracted to broadacre farms in the new markets (Dufty, Peter & Shiji 11). This notion implies that essential food products are being neglected by the immigrants in favor of high returns tending to fast-moving agricultural products. It is therefore recommended that the issue of immigration be strictly controlled so as not to deprive developing and under-developing countries of the necessary human resources to facilitate food production.

Summary and Conclusion

Globalization, in the face of fast transmission of the effect of innovation on all regions of the globe, will keep on quickening. Low-salary nations that don't spend vigorously on examination and innovation will encounter ceaselessly declining costs for agricultural items. Without counterbalancing the cost of production and high-quality yields, agricultural produce will diminish in expenses of land use. Given that globalization leads to urbanization, most people find new alternatives for land use other than agriculture (Ramachandran 35). The little available land delegated to agricultural production, therefore, should be given top priority for adequate funding. States should not desist from investing in infrastructure to boost access to and from the farms, and the same should also be expended on non-farm use inputs such as road networks and security. Since small-scale farmers are crucial to a country’s food security, the excesses of globalization should be monitored strictly not to cripple this institution of food production.

Works Cited

Anderson, Kym. "Globalization's effects on world agricultural trade, 1960–2050." Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 365.1554 (2010): 3007-3021. https://dx.doi.org/10.1098%2Frstb.2010.0131

Chapter 7. Globalization and the Traditional Role of Agriculture[124], www.fao.org/3/y4671e/y4671e0c.htm

Christison, Bill. “The Impact of Globalization on Family Farm Agriculture.” The Impact of Globalization on Family Farm Agriculture by Bill Christison - Rural America / In Motion Magazine, 2000, inmotionmagazine.com/bcbrasil.html.

Cikic, Jovana, and Marica Petrovic. "WOMEN, FARMING AND AGRICULTURAL INNOVATION1." INSTITUTE OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS BELGRADE: 289. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Vladimir

Dufty, Niki, Peter Martin, and Shiji Zhao. "Demand for farm workers." (2019). https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9d13/347d4fac3c54562ac90a13da316c12331f10.pdf

Ebia, Beletchei. West African Cotton and Global Value Chains: From Production to Textiles. Diss. Duke University, 2018. https://dukespace.lib.duke.edu/dspace/bitstream/handle/1...