Globalization and Environmental Destruction
Masakazu YAMASHITA* (Received July 6, 2009)
The merits and demerits of globalization were examined. Although globalization was hailed world over as a desirable economic system, it brought down desertification and sterilization of soil. And what is worse, enlargement of earning differentials between developed and developing countries was also conduced contrary to the world’s expectations.
-G[YQTFU Free trade, Forest destruction, Desertification, Sterilization of soil, Self-determination of peoples
+PVTQFWEVKQP
Globalization, in accordance with the fundamental principles of a market economy and free trade, is currently expanding throughout the world, encompassing not only developed capitalist countries in the West but also former socialist countries1). Globalization has been a hot topic everywhere. People of today’s society, particularly Japanese living in material affluence, emphasize only its positive aspects, expecting it to promote free trade among countries and contribute to a civil society. The present study was conducted to review both the benefits and drawbacks of globalization.
9JCVKUINQDCNK\CVKQP!
Globalization refers to a wide range of human activities performed on an international level without geographic or time restrictions2). In other words, it is intended to spread money, information, and commodities around the world. On the surface, it seems to be a beneficial process, helping people around the world benefit from material-oriented developments and become
wealthy. In fact, the current situation in the world is far from it. The phenomenon of a consumer-based society, which is based on mass production, consumption, and disposal, first developed in the U.S.A. in the 20th century.
Only a handful of countries are now benefiting from it.
In elementary, junior high, and high school, as well as college, we learn that the Industrial Revolution that began in England in the 18th century and the subsequent progress of science and technologies brought prosperity to all human beings. It is true that material affluence in Japan over the past few decades has been achieved as a result of this. However, it is apparent that only a small percentage of countries and people have achieved prosperity due to such scientific and technological developments.
The people living in the G7, or the most developed, countries account for about 11% of the world’s population (over six billion)3). The total number of those living in Europe, North America, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore is only 900 million – less than one sixth of the world’s population. Japan’s GDP is about 32,500 dollars/person (2001), which is among the highest in the world. Developing countries with a GDP of 900 dollars
*Department of Environmental Systems Science, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Doshisha University, Kyo-tanabe, Kyoto 610-0394 Telephone/Fax: +81-774-65-6578 E-mail: myamashi@mail.doshisha.ac.jp
or less are defined as the “least developed countries”4). According to the World Bank, 2.8 billion people (almost 50% of the world’s population) live on less than two dollars a day, and 1.2 billion people live on less than one dollar a day. These living standards are much lower than those of Japanese people5).The wealthiest 14 to 15% generate over 80% of the total GDP, the poorest 20% contribute to only 1%, and the remaining 60% of people generate over 10% of the total GDP.
What is worse, these considerable gaps are still widening each year, probably because of globalization.
Globalization has accelerated the concentration of wealth and exploitation, producing wealth disparity between the rich and poor in the world economy.
)NQDCNK\CVKQPCPFHTGGVTCFG
Globalization viewed in terms of economy means free trade, in which multiple countries import and export products, free from import duties, restrictions, or exchange controls, and without protecting or subsidizing domestic producers. Any country in the world can freely sell domestic products to and purchase from a foreign partner. This “free” trade system appears to be far more reasonable and fairer than restricted trade, particularly when you have no knowledge of this field. In such trade, however, only haves (developed countries) always benefit, and have-nots (developing countries) are significantly disadvantaged. For this reason, multinational businesses of developed countries, based on a large amount of capital, make huge profits in developing nations.
Since the Industrial Revolution, mass production in developed countries has improved productivity per employee and reduced production costs, leading to increases in wages and workers’ purchasing power. They need to extend the market for their mass products, and develop overseas markets. On the other hand, few
developing countries produce and export expensive products to pay for imported goods. However, developed countries strongly encourage their trading partners to import their products while paying back in installments, just like individual consumers using a credit card. As a result, developing countries incur a large amount of debt, and they will have to give up their traditional lifestyle, industries, and culture to pay off this debt.
&GUVTWEVKQPQHEWNVWTGCPFPCVWTG
It has only been twenty or thirty years since globalization began. Nevertheless, major changes have taken place in developing countries over the past few decades. The problem of desertification is becoming serious in many African, Asian, and Middle Eastern countries. The other day, I watched a video on the natural environment in Afghanistan forty years ago: healthy crops growing in vast fields surrounded by green forests.
Nowadays, as we watch television, the only thing we see the land of Afghanistan and Iraq is a vast rock-studded desert. A similar thing is happening in civil war-torn African countries. It is natural to think that desertification in these countries is a result of globalization, instead of natural environmental changes.
Developing countries gain nothing from globalization or economic liberalization. Under the free trade system, they are no longer allowed to grow crops to feed themselves. Instead, they are required to produce and export what developed countries need at low prices.
Not only that, it is almost impossible, no matter how hard they try, for them to achieve industrial development and compete with these developed countries. Deprived of their peaceful lives, long-held traditions, and community, they continue to suffer from ever-increasing economic woes.
A few years ago, I watched a TV program featuring an ethnic minority living in an alpine village in
South America. They had lived in peace and harmony with nature, and, particularly, the water in the rivers and lakes was valuable for their lives. One day, oil was discovered in the village, and Americans started capital investments. Having reached a concession agreement with the government officials, they spent an enormous amount of money to obtain vast areas of land and build drilling facilities. Deprived of not only their clean living environment but also traditions and peaceful community, the villagers moved to other places. Ten years later, when it became difficult for them to make further profits drilling oil, the Americans just left the village. Only abandoned factories and pipelines remained there. Being contaminated by spilt crude oil and industrial waste, the original clean living environment and water have been permanently lost. The peaceful lives in harmony with nature and traditional cultures were destroyed in a short period of time by a small number of profit-seeking people from developed countries. Similar events are still happening around the world.
Until recently, people’s lives in every country on earth had been affluent in their own way. Forty years ago, Africa was covered in forests. However, beautiful forests and lakes in a country called “African Switzerland” have completely disappeared. Around 1960 in Kenya, many people lived in a number of settlements along the coast.
Today, only a small area of wild land remains between residential areas6). In these countries, plagued by serious poverty, famine, and civil wars, the natural environment has changed completely.
The economy in those countries experiencing a population explosion or desertification is assumed to have been affected by developed nations.
4QCFVQGPXKTQPOGPVCNFGUVTWEVKQP
The following is the story of a village that suffered dire poverty due to globalization.
5.1. The beginning of a vicious circle
There was a rural village in a country. For hundreds of years, well-rounded people in the self-sufficient village had lived in peace and harmony with nature, helping each other. They, like many other villages, had their own rules and traditional customs:
“Land is a community property”; “Those who try to monopolize a collective property receive a divine punishment”; “You must not cut down trees growing in the sacred forest”. They actually were far wealthier than what modern people might perceive them to be. The traditional costumes and grand festivals unique to each ethnic group indicate this.
One day, a man from a developed country comes to the village. He has a lot of money and expensive things. Noticing coffee trees in one corner of the village, he comes up with an idea of making money from this. He makes a proposal to the villagers regarding the mass production of coffee. Although coffee is in great demand and he is sure that it is a lucrative business, it does not grow in his country. “If you grow coffee plants on 50%
of the farmland in the village, I will send you food products equivalent to the amount you can produce in the fields”, he says, showing them money and expensive looking presents. How can they turn down such a proposal? He manipulates them like a clever salesman until they agree: e.g., “How about establishing a hospital and school in your village”. They then start to grow coffee plants as they are told, instead of other food products to feed themselves.
Following the agreement to grow coffee plants, the villagers are provided with plenty of food and medical facilities. For a short period of time, they appear to have become wealthy, with a decrease in the infant mortality rate. However, soon the population doubles, and they start to suffer from severe food shortages. At this point, they cannot choose to produce food or go back to a self-supporting economy. The only choice left for them is
to produce and sell more coffee to import food products from abroad.
This coincides with the interests of the man from the developed country, wishing to further expand his coffee business. The villagers start to grow coffee plants on the remaining land as well. This is how a vicious circle of mass production and population growth starts.
The rapid development and population growth during a certain period in many developing countries, including Brazil, Columbia, Ethiopia, and Somalia, are attributable to the mass production of coffee. This also applies to the cultivation of black tea, pepper, cotton, rubber, and peanuts.
5.2. Legitimate colonization
In the above-mentioned cycle, the population continues to grow and food shortages become more and more serious. On the other hand, it is impossible to increase the amount of coffee production. You can produce only a limited amount within a certain area of field. Moreover, as crops consume the nutrients contained in the soil, it becomes increasingly infertile each year. Soil, different from rock, consists of fine sand particles, rotten animals and plants, and microorganisms.
The average depth of soil on the surface of the earth is estimated to be less than one meter. In the natural world, a one centimeter-thick layer of soil is generated over a period of one hundred years. These facts show us how valuable and important soil is for our lives. Human beings cannot live without it.
The only choice left is to increase productivity in a limited area of land. However, the continuous cropping or cultivation of a single type of crop sterilizes the soil, leading to a decrease in production and the quality of crops. The use of pesticides and chemical fertilizers destroys ecosystems, which will require larger amounts of new pesticides. As a small number of people continue to acquire a wider area of land to improve productivity, i.e., agricultural intensification, a hierarchical system
develops, in which peasants having no land work for their landlord.
This class system coincides with the interests of people from developed countries. It is easier for them to convince the landowners to further develop their businesses. During this period, when there is growing demand for farmers, people in the village are encouraged to have as many children as possible. After a period of time, however, the introduction of sophisticated agricultural equipment will cause large-scale unemployment.
The above-mentioned strategies have a lot in common with colonialism. In this sense, globalization represents legitimate colonization.
5.3. Conflicts, refugees, and desertification
The above-mentioned vicious circle is not specific to coffee farms. It is happening with the backdrop of all kinds of crops. Farmers deprived of their land and job will have to clear the woods to make a living, or leave the village to work in cities. Frustration and anger that build up among farmers lead to conflicts, only to be suppressed by landlords who have already accumulated vast areas of land and a great deal of money.
The introduction of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, and agricultural equipment to increase productivity compromises the quality of the land, leading to the destruction of agriculture itself. With the loss of soil little by little, farmland is gradually converted into wasteland containing only sand and rocks, where nothing grows – desertification. History demonstrates that the collapse of civilization anywhere on this planet has been caused by desertification or the sterilization of soil. The sites where the ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian, Indus, and Huang He civilizations flourished 5,000 years ago are now deserts. It is assumed that the desertification of the Sahara was also caused by the collapse of the Roman Empire. All agricultural fields, even so-called breadbaskets, are likely to suffer the same fate in the near
future. They need to prepare themselves regarding how to ensure stable food supply under such circumstances.
After a period of time, the man from developed countries return home, and the landlords flee to other countries with their wealth, leaving numerous peasants with the barren land.
To make matters worse, the peasants are still in serious debt, liable for the costs of pesticides, chemical fertilizers, and agricultural equipment. However, no crop will grow in this village any more. Robberies and conflicts develop into civil war, in which the villagers fight against each other using weapons made in developed countries. Only at this point, the news media focuses on the situation of the village, although they broadcast it as the news of starving refugees as a result of a civil war with a political background.
9J[FQFGXGNQRKPIEQWPVTKGUTGOCKPRQQT!
It is said that the gap between the rich and poor has more than doubled over the past thirty years. Prices and wages in the wealthiest countries are nearly a hundred times higher than those in the poorest developing countries. Trade imbalances occur between these developed (exporters of sophisticated industrial products) and developing countries (exporting primary commodities and raw materials). When an economic power trades with a poor country, in which commodity prices are low, the latter runs up debts; developed countries purchase raw materials at low prices and sell high-priced products, while developing countries selling raw materials at low prices and purchasing expensive industrial products become poorer. When a developing country has to purchase a tractor at ten million yen while exporting iron, a material used to produce one, which amounts to only 1,000 yen, for example, it is obvious that an imbalance occurs.
Developing countries have to either remain as
exporters of a primary product (e.g., peanuts, cotton, and palm), or invite foreign businesses from developed countries to manufacture and import industrial products utilizing their own inexpensive labor. Cultivation of a single crop causes irreversible damage to the fields and natural environment, which leads to the devastation of the entire farming village and its culture. Since primary products grown in these countries cannot sell at high prices, it is impossible, no matter how hard they work, for them to achieve sufficient development to compete with developed countries. Under the present trade system, in which developing countries are required to sell primary commodities and raw materials at low prices and purchase industrial products, the vicious cycle will continue indefinitely, haves getting wealthier and have-nots becoming poorer.
The U.S. produces the largest amount of grain in the world. Progress in science and technology, the use of large amounts of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, and the introduction of agricultural equipment have markedly increased the amount of grain production per farmer.
While the population of the U.S. is 280 million, the amount of grain produced by two million farmers in the country is equivalent to what is required to feed 500 million people7). This means that as much as 50% is surplus. The government provides subsidies to help export the surplus grain to foreign countries. Otherwise, domestic grain price decline and severe price competition would occur, leading to the unemployment of numerous farmers.
With the help of government subsidies, they can export their grain products at a price that is equal to or less than the domestic market price in an importing country. If the domestic grain production and industry decline, the U.S. will further increase its share in that country. In this way, the U.S., Canada, and European countries reduce surplus crops, maintain stable domestic prices, and protect their farmers. With agricultural price
support, farmers in these countries are allowed to produce as much as they want.
On the other hand, agricultural farms in Asian, including Japan, and African countries have suffered catastrophic damage from inexpensively imported grain products. Because of low productivity, many farmers cannot continue to produce crops. Some may work in slash-and-burn farming, and others live in slum areas while receiving food assistance from developed countries.
The same thing goes for industrial products.
Developed countries can mass-produce textiles, using petroleum and automated technologies, and export them at low prices. These imported products threaten the domestic textile industry in many countries, putting a large number of employees out of work.
Some engineers and researchers are not able to view things from multiple perspectives, devoting themselves to their work or research to obtain patents.
Once in a while, they need to reflect on the impact of their research.
%CPNCVGEQOGTUQXGTEQOGVJGKTFKUCFXCPVCIG!
In capitalist countries, industrial and agricultural products are produced using invested capital. In agriculture and other primary industries, only a limited size of crop can be produced within a certain area of farmland, which determines the maximum limit of effective investment; an increase in investment does not necessarily enhance productivity. However, this does not seem to apply to modern industries, which have been working on economic and financial deregulation as well as information globalization.
Let us look at the IT-related industry. Windows is the most dominant OS for personal computers, running far ahead of latecomers such as Macintosh and Linux systems. Products used by the majority often dominate
the market, regardless of their quality in some cases. So was the case with VHS and Betamax video cassette recorders. Although Betamax hit the home video market earlier, VHS dominated in the end because of its successful sales promotion.
In the real economy, workers manufacture products using materials in factories. On the other hand, information-related products, similar to finance, are intangible: e.g., computer software, video games, and music. Companies produce and sell an enormous amount of identical copies, and, hence, the more they sell, the lower the manufacturing cost. In these IT and financial industries, a handful of companies often achieve huge success.
Globalization, which started receiving attention around 1980, became the trend in the mid 1990’s.
Although the IT industry has been rapidly developing since the IT revolution, few Japanese IT businesses have made significant achievements, probably because of the system within the industry in favor of the U.S.
)NQDCNK\CVKQPCPFFGXCUVCVKQP
Professor O. Nishimura of Faculty of Economics, Doshisha University, stated that a large number of employees were working for automobile factories in Detroit, U.S.A. when the sales of Japanese cars rapidly increased8). On the other hand, low-priced agricultural products imported from the U.S. and Australia have plagued Japanese agriculture, putting numerous farmers out of work. Judging from the current situation, Japan appears to have decided to shun agriculture for further industrialization.
As these cases indicate, globalization is related to the trend of international specialization. Recently, some have suggested that Japan should stop growing rice, importing it from the U.S.A., Thailand, and other Asian countries. It is as if they are proposing to build
semiconductor, automobile, and IT-related factories on paddy fields at the expense of agricultural communities in Japan. If we stop producing rice and other agricultural products, it will lead to the devastation of fields, mountain forests, and the entire natural environment. We need to think about what is in the best interests for Japanese people and society from a long-term perspective.
In today’s world, the poorest countries have no choice but to serve as exporters of primary commodities and raw materials, and it is difficult for them to escape from their economic woes. Moreover, most of these countries produce only one type of crop, which has harmful effects on the natural environment and ecosystems. Crops grow on balanced ecosystems in which a wide variety of species coexist. The production or cultivation of a single type of crop, plant, or animal, e.g., coffee, peanuts, and shrimp, causes devastating damage to ecosystems that have been maintained over several thousand years. In some developed countries, particularly in Japan, where the types of crop grown are limited, the problem of devastated natural environments and farming villages is becoming serious.
%QPENWUKQPU
Living in a town or village blessed with beautiful land, forests, seas, and rivers - it is an ideal way of life.
However, such natural abundance is not reflected as a GDP (an economic indicator) growth rate. Developed countries have achieved high GDP growth rates at the expense of the natural environment. Economic and emotional development, in the true sense, should be achieved through the conservation of natural resources.
Being raised in a rural area, I still remember what farming villages were like within fifteen years after the Second World War. At that time, the clear water flowing in rivers and streams was used as drinking and household
water. Most farmers bred cows in a stable next to their house. Streets in every village were clean and free of trash. Although piles of manure compost were seen everywhere, their smell was not unpleasant. As long as a country has fertile land, it can be regarded as being wealthy. In historical dramas and movies, we often see the scene of peasants in the Edo period living hand to mouth. This does not seem to be based on fact. People in farming villages at that time must have been better off. A variety of traditional festivals and miniature shrines, temples, and shrines unique to each village prove this.
During the Second World War, children evacuated from devastated cities to affluent rural areas.
According to Professor M. Hara of School of Theology, Doshisha University, who was involved in research activities in Thailand for one year, Thai farmers are on the decrease due to industrialization. Thailand is a major exporter of agricultural products, with 70% of the population being farmers even today9). However, if industrialization and the decline of agriculture continue at this pace, agricultural production in the country will be reduced to the minimum to maintain food self-sufficiency, affecting Japan and many other food-importing countries. Japan should prepare itself regarding how to ensure a stable food supply under such a circumstance.
During the period of the economic bubble, many Japanese were obsessed with the idea of placing the highest priority on the economy, and nature, animals, plants, and even humans were viewed as instruments to make money by some people. Now, we seem to be getting paid back in the form of environmental destruction, leading to the reduced quality of our lives.
From my point of view, the prevention of environmental destruction and the concept of animism: all creatures including humans living in the natural world should be respected and cherished, have much in common. I question the significance of globalization, if it conflicts
with these values.
This work was supported by a grant from Science and Engineering Research Institute, Doshisha University.
4GHGTGPEGU
1) Z. Bauman, Globalization. The Human Consequences, (Columbia U. P., 1998), p. 1-2.
2) Imidas 2004, (Shueisha, 2004), p. 329.
3) Kokusairenngo Sekaijinko Nenkan 2000, (Hara Shobo, 2000).
4) Imidas 2004, (Shueisha, 2004), p. 332.
5) L. R. Brown, Chikyu Hakusho 2001-2002, (Ienohikarikyokai, 2002), p.11.
6) N. Myers, “Global Security,” in Life Stories, (U. of California Press, 2000), p. 169.
7) L. R. Brown, PLAN B 2.0, Rescuing a Planet under Stress and a Civilization in Trouble, (World Watch Japan, 2006) p. 224-227.
8) O. Nishimura, Private communication.
9) M. Hara, Private communication.
