As defined by the Merriam-Webster English language dictionary, globalization is the tendency of investment funds and businesses to move beyond domestic and national markets to other markets around the globe and thereby increase the inter-connectivity of different markets. Globalization has taken a turn for the worst over the past 48 years. Globalization in Africa began in 1957, just after the Cold War, and since then, and Africa has not properly been able to integrate itself into the global economy.
Till date, Africa has been suffering the repercussions of surrounding continents, other than itself, prospering from globalization; and so, the time has come for Africa to make an avid effort to also reap the potential benefits of globalization. Ironically though, globalization, has turned Africa into a dead weight and a free loader in respect to the global economy. In order to support this inference, an intensive investigation of the policies imposed on African nations, aid and the necessity of good governance, and the effects of Foreign Direct Investment's (FDI), must be considered.
U.S. foreign policies that have been imposed on Africa are acting as barriers that are hindering Africa from self-rehabilitation. Foreign aid needed to initiate this self-rehabilitation is far too minimal and dispersed to be useful; this, augmented by corrupt governments improperly distributing funds, prevents the African population not only from growing with the global economy, but in many instances, it also pushes Africa further down the international economic spectrum.
Another predicament that appears to be stagnating the African economy is the capitalist concept of FDI that encourages multinational corporations (MNCs) to invest in the continent. Such corporations manufacture goods that are not only unaffordable but also useless to an immense proportion of the population. As the United States continues to pursue policies that are antithetical to Africa's interests, the issue of hunger remains one of Africa's most devastating burdens, causing half of the 47 sub-Saharan countries to require emergency food intervention.
According to Yale Global writer Paul Kwengwere, the U.S. is fully responsible for exploiting starvation in Malawi to promote unsuitable agricultural policies through international institutions and to distribute genetically modified products, as if to use Malawians as guinea pigs to test such controversial products. In order for Malawi to receive loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), it had to completely expose its economy, which resulted in the depletion of social services and the removal of all agricultural subsidies.
Tags: Merriam-Webster, globalization, global economy,African nations, Foreign Direct Investments,U.S. foreign policies,International Monetary Fund
[...] This has been proven through an intensive investigation of the policies imposed on African nations, aid and the necessity of good governance, and the effects of FDI. In the words of Joseph Stiglitz, Nobel Prive winner for Economics in 2001: “Understanding the choices requires understanding the causes and nature of poverty. It is not that the poor are lazy: they often work harder, with longer hours, than those who are better off. Many are caught in a series of vicious spirals: lack of food leads to ill health. [...]
[...] These results, prevent Africa from feeding its own population and cost the continent tens of billions of dollars each year in lost agricultural revenues. The IMF also improperly advised the Malawian government to sell 20,000 tonnes of maize in reserves in order to repay a loan granted to them by the IMF which resulted in famine. Other such detrimental policies include the U.S. trade representative's continuation to block implementation of the 2001 Doha Declaration on trade, which called for looser patent rules in order to give African countries greater access to essential anti-AIDS drugs. [...]
[...] The Effects of Globalization on the State in Africa: Harnessing the Benefits and Minimizing the Costs November 2001.
[...] The gap can be 100 to one in some cases if you simply measure the gross national product per person in the United States versus, say, a country in Africa like Botswana, maybe a gap of $30,000 per person and $300 per person. Another predicament that appears to be stagnating the African economy is the capitalist concept of FDI which encourages multinational corporations (MNCs) to invest in international projects. Such corporations manufacture goods that are not only unaffordable but also futile to an immense proportion of the population. [...]
using our reader.