Definitions of Globalization

Program on the Geopolitical Implications of
Globalization and Transnational Security












Definitions of Globalization:
A Comprehensive Overview
and a Proposed Definition



Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan
Senior Scholar in Geostrategy and
Director of the Program on the
Geopolitical Implications of Globalization
and Transnational Security
Geneva Centre for Security Policy


Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann
Director
Geneva Centre for Security Policy



June 19, 2006


To comment, please email Ms. Bethany Webster at b.webster@gcsp.ch.
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

Avenue de la Paix 7bis
Telephone
+41 22 906 83 17

P.O. Box 1295
Telefax
+41 22 906 16 49
CH-1211 Geneva 1
www.gcsp.ch
info@gcsp.ch

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
Abstract

Many authors have attempted, with relative success, to define
globalization in a variety of ways. Some claim that it cannot be done,
others claim that it would constrain the meaning to do so, and still
others have defied these two beliefs and have constructed a working
definition. Despite differing opinions about developing a definition, all
authors agree on one thing: that defining this term is anything but easy.
This paper will attempt to provide a comprehensive overview of the
existing definitions of globalization and introduce our proposed
definition:

“Globalization is a process that encompasses the causes, course, and
consequences of transnational and transcultural integration of human
and non-human activities.”


All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

2

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
Introduction
Globalization is not a single concept that can be defined and encompassed within a set time
frame, nor is it a process that can be defined clearly with a beginning and an end.
Furthermore, it cannot be expounded upon with certainty and be applicable to all people and
in all situations. Globalization involves economic integration; the transfer of policies across
borders; the transmission of knowledge; cultural stability; the reproduction, relations, and
discourses of power; it is a global process, a concept, a revolution, and “an establishment of
the global market free from sociopolitical control.”1 Globalization encompasses all of these
things. It is a concept that has been defined variously over the years, with some connotations
referring to progress, development and stability, integration and cooperation, and others
referring to regression, colonialism, and destabilization. Despite these challenges, this term
brings with it a multitude of hidden agendas. An individual’s political ideology, geographic
location, social status, cultural background, and ethnic and religious affiliation provide the
background that determines how globalization is interpreted. In 1995, Martin Khor, President
of the Third World Network2 in Malaysia, referred to globalization as colonization.
Concurrently, Swedish journalist Thomas Larsson, in his book The Race to the Top: The Real
Story of Globalization (2001), stated that globalization:

“is the process of world shrinkage, of distances getting shorter,
things moving closer. It pertains to the increasing ease with
which somebody on one side of the world can interact, to mutual
benefit, with somebody on the other side of the world.”3

These two different interpretations reflect different perspectives rooted in different world
positions.

By its nature, globalization spans a multitude of disciplines, communities, and cultures. This,
of course, allows for a variety of viewpoints, be they economic, social, or political. The
definitions presented here reflect some of those viewpoints. It is also vital that these
definitions be presented against the reality of the global situation, as Vidya S. A. Kumar rightly
points out in his article “A Critical Methodology of Globalization: Politics of the 21st Century?”.
It is, however, beyond the scope of this paper to assess the extent to which each of the
statements captures reality. Rather, we look at issues surrounding the difficulties of defining
globalization and discuss the benefits of doing so within the larger debate.

The impact of globalization is vast, as the definitions that we present here indicate. One
question remains regarding the potential difficulty of trying to define this concept, as well as
the limitations involved in trying to do so: does this hinder discussions about globalization?
Does the fact that globalization requires constant defining inhibit or undermine true academic
debate about the geopolitical implications of this process before that debate even begins?
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

3

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
This paper does not propose a definition that will be useful and acceptable to everyone. Nor
does it try to justify why one definition might be better than another. Rather, we suggest
reviewing the definitions that are available in an attempt to truly understand this concept, and
we also propose a definition that we think might be broad enough to address most aspects of
the process.

Methodology
This study provides a thorough overview of existing definitions of globalization, which we were
able to use to develop our own definition. In reviewing current definitions, it is at once
apparent that some are rather narrow and exclusive, while others are broad and inclusive.
Each approach has its strengths and weaknesses: more-general definitions tend to be all-
encompassing but more abstract, while more-specific definitions are better justified but
narrower in scope. For example, Kenichi Ohmae stated in 1992 that “globalization means the
onset of the borderless world.”4 This definition does not have positive or negative
connotations but is vague and inclusive. This definition could be used as a basis for a working
paper on a number of subjects, including technology, trade agreements, and just about any
other issue that deals with overcoming traditional boundaries. This definition is a bit too
vague, however, for discussions on the detailed implications of globalization. Alternatively, a
detailed definition would be suited to this type of discussion. Robert Cox provides a good
example of this approach: “the characteristics of the globalization trend include the
internationalizing of production, the new international division of labor, new migratory
movements from South to North, the new competitive environment that accelerates these
processes, and the internationalizing of the state… making states into agencies of the
globalizing world.”5 This definition is more detailed and contributes more to the discussion.
Despite this benefit, this can also be limiting, as it may only be applicable to those that agree
with this definition. As mentioned earlier, this can also stall the debate about the implications
of this type of globalization because a discussion about negative and positive connotations
could lend itself to a paper and subsequent discussion all on its own without delving into
deeper ramifications.

So how should one go about defining globalization? Some academics have determined that it
is a useless task. Kumar argues that “the debate about what to do about globalization is still
very much a debate about what globalization is.”6 His article focuses on the debate regarding
the definition of such a term and what relation this has to reality. This means that he also
needs to be cautious in claiming that some definitions come closer to reality than others,
which is not what we intend to do in this article. We have compiled a comprehensive list of
definitions of globalization in order to provide a survey of what some academics, theorists,
sociologists, politicians, and leaders claim globalization actually is.


All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

4

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
Results
The results of our overview appear in a table later in this paper. We gathered definitions from
both academic and resource guides in an attempt to look for patterns and similarities. In
general, we found agreement with George Ritzer, who, in his article “The Globalization of
Nothing,” wrote: “[a]ttitudes toward globalization depend, among other things, on whether one
gains or loses from it.”7

In reviewing all of these definitions, it is clear that the literature does not come any closer to
an understanding of what globalization actually is. Due to the complexity of the concept,
research projects, articles, and discussions usually remain focused on a single aspect of
globalization in order to be able to provide some concrete solutions and recommendations. It
is understandable that a definition developed for a particular paper, if one is developed at all,
would focus on the aspect in question in order to provide a benchmark for the remainder of
the paper. No matter what definition you adhere to, globalization is complex and multifaceted.
Therefore, any definition that comes close to reflecting the reality of globalization must also be
complex and multifaceted. Many of the definitions presented here are useful in a number of
cases and disciplines, but others remain focused on one point or another, which limits their
scope (which is the purpose of their usage). However, most scholars realize the significance a
definition can have. Like the concept of globalization itself, the definitions presented here are
broad and may be perceived in a variety of ways. They appear in chronological order.

In our opinion, and based on our knowledge of globalization as it is understood today, we
propose the following definition:

“Globalization is a process that encompasses the causes, course, and
consequences of transnational and transcultural integration of human
and non-human activities.”

In the development of our own definition of globalization, it was vital to utilize a broad
perspective in order for it to be brief yet as comprehensive as possible. Globalization is not an
endpoint to be discussed and then forgotten. Rather, it is a process, a current that has been
impacting communities, cultures, and economies for hundreds of years. It is a result of the
transnational and transcultural integrations that have occurred globally throughout human
history. It encompasses the causes, the course, and the consequences of these integrations.
This intermingling has transpired through activities that are both human and non-human in
nature. Human activities encompass the linguistic, cultural, economic, and political aspects of
human life (along with many others) that are a part of the human and social sphere. It is also
important to include non-human activities, which incorporate, but are not limited to, the spread
of bacteria and non-human diseases such as bird flu, as well as natural disasters such as
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

5

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
tornadoes, tsunamis, earthquakes, and hurricanes. As all of these issues impact human and
global security, it is our opinion that a truly comprehensive definition must address them. In
addition, it is important to recognize that globalization is not a force that needs to be stopped;
rather, it is a process that influences each of us in a number of ways, both to our benefit and
also to our detriment. When embraced in the context of our definition, globalization can be
understood in a way that allows for a greater appreciation of, and, consequently, movement
towards furthering, individual, as well as global, security and stability.

Discussion
This overview of current definitions of globalization can arguably leave one feeling more
confused in the discourse than before. The abundance of definitions is clearly an indication of
the varying opinions that have developed regarding this concept since it first appeared in
Webster’s dictionary in 1961.8 The past decades have allowed for the creativity of humankind
to develop the definitions that appear in this paper. However, abundance does not necessarily
indicate that with each new definition there has been marked improvement.

Since the debate over globalization stems largely from the act of defining the concept, it is
important to see the progression of where the definitions have come from and how different
connotations have emerged. This overview illustrates that many of the definitions refer to
questions of economics: of the 114 definitions presented here, 67 of them make some
reference to the economic dimension either through market expansion or the selling of goods
and services. Many of these definitions do, however, include other dimensions: quite often
they involve political and social aspects as well. However, this does indicate that notions of
globalization, at least in our representation, tend to lean toward the economic roots of the
concept.

Similarly, the definitions tend to be multifaceted and complex. They are rarely confined to one
or two lines; rather, an elaborate definition is more often the norm in addressing this issue.
This is illustrative of the complex nature of globalization: in attempting to determine how the
impact of globalization is most felt, whether politically, economically, or socially, one
frequently finds oneself debating aspects that are also multidimensional. This appears to be
universal, as a majority of our authors have written definitions that are lengthy. Therefore, it is
safe to assume that the majority of definitions will encompass such aspects.

So what conclusions might we draw from this overview? To what extent have the definitions
helped us understand more fully the concept of globalization? Why should one engage in
such a study?

Globalization is evolutionary; it is a fluid process that is constantly changing with the
development of human society. This becomes more evident when assessing the various
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

6

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
attempts at defining this idea. This paper argues that the perspective of the person who
defines globalization shapes any definition thereof. One could reflect on the impact of
globalization for days without having a clear understanding of what in reality the term means.
By analyzing what has been offered in attempts to express the meaning of such a complex
idea, it forces the issue to be simplified in one or two sentences. In this task, the core of the
discourse must be determined by the author. The definition is a clear indication of what the
author’s perspective is on where globalization has come from and, more importantly, what it
will mean in geopolitical terms in the future. By only having an abstract concept and nothing
concrete, there is no reference point. Does this mean, then, that in order to have a worthwhile
debate on globalization, a definition must be agreed upon at the outset?

In a way, this is the case. If nothing else, this overview of definitions has made it clear that
globalization is many things to many different people. As Arjun Appadurai noted in 1996,
“globalization is a ‘world of things’ that have ‘different speeds, axes, points of origin and
termination, and varied relationships to institutional structures in different regions, nations, or
societies.’”9 This captures the complexity of globalization without actually defining it. It implies
that further elaboration would not be particularly useful.

The future of globalization is one that no academic would venture to try to predict. The fluidity
of this concept makes concrete recommendations for a definition difficult. By looking at the
ways in which the definition has changed over the past 45 years, one can ascertain that the
future will not give way to a simpler or a more refined means of arriving at a clearer
conceptualization of the process. There are definitions presented in our table that are
timeless, and there are those that indicate that globalization is a trend. Anthony McGrew’s
elaboration of this concept illustrates this point:

“globalization [is] a process which generates flows and
connections, not simply across nation-states and national
territorial boundaries, but between global regions, continents and
civilizations. This invites a definition of globalization as: ‘an
historical process which engenders a significant shift in the
spatial reach of networks and systems of social relations to
transcontinental or interregional patterns of human organization,
activity and the exercise of power.’”10

The challenge of defining globalization is not going to disappear or lose importance anytime in
the near future. By exploring the various explanations and thoughts behind the idea that has
come to be called globalization, we are able to see how the concept has been identified over
the course of the approximately thirty years represented in Table 1. It allows for a balanced
view of globalization in a way that can allow for a better understanding of where the term is
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

7

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
rooted and where it might be headed in future research and policy work. As globalization
exists at different times and means different things to different facets of society and the
international system, it can never fully be defined to the satisfaction of all who are impacted
by its implications. Despite this difficulty, the definitions do permit a comprehensive
understanding of globalization that is extensive enough to allow us to see what lies at the core
of the thoughts of those thinking about the concept in modern discourse.

Conclusion
The remaining questions center around the value that defining this concept adds to the
globalization debate. It could be argued that the discussion that stems from the definition
issue is in fact a vital part of the discourse itself. Sociologist Cesare Poppi contributes a
thought in this regard:

“The literature stemming from the debate on globalization has
grown in the last decade beyond any individual’s capability of
extracting a workable definition of the concept. In a sense, the
meaning of the concept is self-evident, in another, it is vague and
obscure as its reaches are wide and constantly shifting. Perhaps,
more than any other concept, globalization is the debate about
it.”11

The debate surrounding globalization is a large part of its lifeblood. Without it, there would be
no need for a paper of this nature, nor would there be the resources to pull together so many
definitions. Poppi is correct: globalization is the debate, and the debate is globalization.
Without one, the other is inconceivable. The matter of defining globalization can be deemed
useless because of its shifting nature, its ambiguity, its influence from the perspective from
which one views it. But the attempt, even if it feels like an everlasting and futile task, does
contribute to the debate and does stimulate discussion about globalization. Searching for a
definition thus does help renew focus on the policy challenges and responses needed, which
in turn sheds further light on the globalization process and its many-sided impact on stability.
Being unable to come up with a Webster’s-dictionary-style definition is part of what makes it
an interesting point of departure for further discussion and study.

All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

8

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition
Table 1: Definitions of Globalization1 (in chronological order)
SOURCE DEFINITION
Immanuel Wallerstein, The Modern World System:
“globalization represents the triumph of a capitalist world economy tied
Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European
together by a global division of labour.”
World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century (New York:
Academic Press, 1974), as cited in R. J. Holton,
Globalization and the Nation-State (London: Macmillan
Press, 1998), p. 11.
David Harvey, The Condition of Postmodernity (Oxford:
“…the compression of time and space.”
Blackwell, 1989), as cited in R. J. Holton, Globalization and
the Nation-State (London: Macmillan Press, 1998), p. 8.
Martin Albrow, “Introduction”, in M. Albrow and E. King
“ …all those processes by which the peoples of the world are incorporated
(eds.), Globalization, Knowledge and Society (London:
into a single world society.”
Sage, 1990), p. 8, as cited in R. J. Holton, Globalization
and the Nation-State (London: Macmillan Press, 1998), p.
15.
Anthony Giddens, The Consequences of Modernity
“Globalization can thus be defined as the intensification of worldwide social
(Cambridge: Polity Press, 1990), p. 64.
relations which link distant localities in such a way that local happenings are
shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa.”
Arjun Appadurai, “Disjuncture and Difference in the
“The critical point is that both sides of the coin of global cultural process
Global Cultural Economy”, in M. Featherstone (ed.), Global
today are products of the infinitely varied mutual contest of sameness and
Culture: Nationalism, Globalization and Modernity (London:
difference on a stage characterized by radical disjunctures between different
Sage, 1990), p. 308, as cited in Chi-yu Chang, “How
sorts of global flows and the uncertain landscapes created in and through
American Culture Correlates the Process of Globalization”,
these disjunctures.”
Asian EFL Journal, Vol. 6, Issue 3, September 2004.
Peter Dicken, Global Shift: The Internationalization of
“…globalization is ‘qualitatively different’ from internationalization… it
Economic Activity (London: Guilford Press, 1992), p. 1, p.
represents ‘a more advanced and complex form of internationalization which
87, as cited in I. Clark, Globalization and International
implies a degree of functional integration between internationally dispersed
Relations Theory (New York: Oxford University Press,
economic activities.’” (p. 1) … “‘the degree of interdependence and
1999), p. 38.
integration between national economies.’” (p. 87)
Kenichi Ohmae, The Borderless World: Power and
“…globalization means the onset of the borderless world…”
Strategy in the Global Marketplace (London: HarperCollins,
1992), as cited in RAWOO Netherlands Development
Assistance Research Council, “Coping with Globalization:
The Need for Research Concerning the Local Response to
Globalization in Developing Countries”, Publication No. 20,
2000, p. 14.
Roland Robertson, Globalization: Social Theory and
”…refers both to the compression of the world and the intensification of
Global Culture (London: Sage, 1992), p. 8.
consciousness of the world as a whole.”
OECD, Intra-Firm Trade (Paris: OECD, 1993), p. 7, as
“…understood as the phenomenon by which markets and production in
cited in R. Brinkman and J. Brinkman, “Corporate Power
different countries are becoming increasingly interdependent due to the
and the Globalization Process”, International Journal of
dynamics of trade in goods and services and the flows of capital and
Social Economics, Vol. 29, No. 9, 2002, pp. 730-752, pp.
technology.”
730-731.


1 Whenever possible, citations were taken from original sources.
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

9

---

Dr. Nayef R.F. Al-Rodhan

Definitions of Globalization:
Ambassador Gérard Stoudmann A Comprehensive Overview and a Proposed Definition

Robert Cox, “Multilateralism and the Democratization of
“The characteristics of the globalization trend include the internationalizing
World Order”, paper for the International Symposium on
of production, the new international division of labor, new migratory
Sources of Innovation in Multilateralism, Lausanne, May
movements from South to North, the new competitive environment that
26-28, 1994, as cited in J. A. Scholte, “The Globalization of
accelerates these processes, and the internationalizing of the state…making
World Politics”, in J. Baylis and S. Smith (eds.), The
states into agencies of the globalizing world.”
Globalization of World Politics, An Introduction to
International Relations (New York: Oxford University Press,
1999), p. 15.
Mike Featherstone, Undoing Culture, Globalization,
“The process of globalization suggests simultaneously two images of
Postmodernism and Identity (London: Sage, 1995), pp. 6-7,
culture. The first image entails the extension outwards of a particular culture
as cited in “Culture Communities: Some Other Viewpoints”,
to its limit, the globe. Heterogeneous cultures become incorporated and
Issues in Global Education, Newsletter of the American
integrated into a dominant culture which eventually covers the whole world.
Forum for Global Education, Issue No. 158, 2000.
The second image points to the compression of cultures. Things formerly
held apart are now brought into contact and juxtaposition.”
Hans-Henrik Holm and Georg Sorensen (eds.), Whose
“…the intensification of economic, political, social and cultural relations
World Order? Uneven Globalization and the End of the
across borders.”
Cold War (Boulder: Westview Press, 1995), p. 1, as cited in
R. J. Holton, Globalization and the Nation-State (London:
Macmillan Press, 1998), p. 11.
Rosabeth Moss Kanter, World Class: Thriving Locally in
“The world is becoming a global shopping mall in which ideas and products
the Global Economy (New York: Simon and Schuster,
are available everywhere at the same time.”
1995), as cited in J. A. Scholte, “The Globalization of World
Politics”, in J. Baylis and S. Smith (eds.), The Globalization
of World Politics, An Introduction to International Relations
(New York: Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 15.
Martin Khor, 1995, as cited in J. A. Scholte, “The
“Globalization is what we in the Third World have for several centuries called
Globalization of World Politics”, in J. Baylis and S. Smith
colonization.”
(eds.), The Globalization of World Politics, An Introduction
to International Relations (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1999), p. 15.
Robert Spich, “Globalization Folklore: Problems of Myth
“[I]t is a mind set, an idea set, an ideal visualization, a popular metaphor
and Ideology in the Discourse on Globalization”, Journal of
and, finally, a stylized way of thinking about complex international
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1995,
developments.”
pp. 6-29, pp. 10-11.
Robert Spich, “Globalization Folklore: Problems of Myth
“Globalization is a conceptualization of the international political economy
and Ideology in the Discourse on Globalization”, Journal of
which suggests and believes essentially that all economic activity, whether
Organizational Change Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1995,
local, regional or national, must be conducted within a perspective and
pp. 6-29, p. 7.
attitude that constantly is global and worldwide in its scope.”
David Steingard and Dale Fitzgibbons, “Challenging the
“…globalization as an ideological construct devised to satisfy capitalism’s
Juggernaut of Globalization: A Manifesto for Academic
need for new markets and labour sources and propelled by the uncritical
Praxis”, Journal of Organizational Change Management,
‘sycophancy’ of the international academic business community.”
Vol. 8, No. 4, 1995, pp. 30-54, as cited in P. Kelly, “The
Geographies and Politics of Globalization”, Progress in
Human Geography, Vol. 23, No. 3, 1999, pp. 379-400, p.
383.
C. Walck and D. Bilimoria, “Editorial: Challenging
“…globalization is not an output of the ‘real’ forces of markets and
‘Globalization’ Discourses”, Journal of Organizational
technologies, but is rather an input in the form of rhetorical and discursive
Change Management, Vol. 8, No. 4, 1995, pp. 3-5, p. 3, as
constructs, practices and ideologies which some groups are imposing on
cited in P. Kelly, “The Geographies and Politics of
others for political and economic gain.”
Globalization”, Progress in Human Geography, Vol. 23, No.
3, 1999, pp. 379-400, p. 383.
All copyrights are reserved by the authors.

10

---