Globalization → De-globalization → Post-globalization

Comprehensive Exam Notes

1. INTRODUCTION
Globalization is one of the most debated concepts in contemporary social science. At its core, it
refers to a multidimensional set of social processes that create, multiply, stretch, and intensify
worldwide social interdependencies and exchanges — while simultaneously fostering a growing
awareness of deepening connections between the local and the distant (Steger).
Think of it this way: when Osama bin Laden's videotape was delivered to Al-Jazeera in Kabul
and within hours was broadcast globally on CNN — that moment captured the essence of
globalization. Even those who oppose modernity cannot escape the very networks
globalization creates.
The story of globalization does not end with integration. Since the late 2000s — and dramatically
after 2016 — the world has witnessed a pushback against global integration, giving rise to the
concepts of de-globalization and post-globalization. These are not simply about globalization
going into reverse; they represent a transformation of how global interconnectedness is
structured, governed, and experienced.
The broad trajectory:
Globalization → intensifying cross-border flows, liberal international order, open markets
De-globalization → slowdown/reversal, protectionism, nationalism, institutional crisis
Post-globalization → reconfiguration, regionalization, selective connectivity, new global
order

2. UNDERSTANDING GLOBALIZATION
(a) What Is Globalization?
Scholars have struggled to define globalization, and there is no single consensus definition. As
Ritzer notes, "everything in globalization studies seems to be up-for-grabs." However, common
themes emerge across major definitions:
 Scholar Definition

Anthony "Intensification of worldwide social relations which link distant localities in such a way
Giddens that local happenings are shaped by events occurring many miles away and vice versa."

Roland "Compression of the world and the intensification of consciousness of the world as a
Robertson whole."

David Held "A transformation in the spatial organization of social relations… generating
transcontinental or interregional flows and networks."

James "Globalization compresses the time and space aspects of social relations."
Mittelman

Steger "A multidimensional set of social processes that create, multiply, stretch, and intensify
worldwide social interdependencies and exchanges while fostering a growing awareness
of deepening connections between the local and the distant."

Key distinction (Steger): Between globality (the social condition of global interconnection) and
globalization (the ongoing process moving toward that condition). Globalization is not a static
end-state — it is dynamic and unfolding.

(b) Four Core Features/Qualities of Globalization (Steger's Framework)

1. Creation and multiplication of social networks — new linkages that cross political,
economic, cultural, and geographical boundaries (e.g., Al-Jazeera as a global news network
built on satellite tech, international agreements, corporate partnerships).
2. Expansion and stretching of social relations — today's financial markets stretch around
the globe; organizations like the UN, EU, Amnesty International, and even terrorist
networks like Al Qaeda operate across dozens of nations.
3. Intensification and acceleration — the Internet relays information in seconds; satellites
give real-time pictures. "Globalization compresses time and space" — things are getting
faster and distances are shrinking. Manuel Castells: the rise of the global 'network society'
depends on technological revolution.
4. Growing subjective consciousness — globalization also happens in the mind. People
become increasingly aware of interdependence, which reshapes identities, communities,
and the way people act. This is what Robertson called the "intensification of consciousness
of the world as a whole."

(c) Dimensions of Globalization (Ritzer's typology)

Globalization is not one process — it is many globalizations operating simultaneously:
 Economic globalization — free trade, FDI, MNCs, global supply chains, financial markets.
This is what most people mean by globalization. World trade as % of GDP rose from 30%
(1973) → 60% (2008) → 71% (2018).
Political globalization — multilateral institutions (UN, WTO, IMF), global governance,
international law, NGOs. Goes beyond just inter-state relations.
Cultural globalization — spread of media, food, music, film, values across borders. Includes
both homogenization fears AND hybridity/glocalization.
Technological globalization — Internet, digital networks, satellite communication as
drivers.
Health/medical globalization — spread of diseases (COVID-19, AIDS, influenza) as well as
spread of medical knowledge.
Religious globalization — global spread of Christianity, Islam, etc.
Educational globalization — spread of universities, MBA programs, standardized higher
education systems.

Important: Different globalizations have different points of origin. Economic globalization

may have taken off post-WWII; religious globalization goes back centuries. There is no single
starting point.

(d) The Globalization Debate: Globalists vs. Skeptics (Ritzer)

Dimension Globalists Skeptics

Existence Globalization exists and encompasses Vast portions of the world are excluded; it is an
virtually all of the globe over-simplification

Nation- Nation-state declining; sovereignty Nation-state reasserting itself; remains the

state eroding key player

Economy MNCs, transnational economy, global Most MNCs are nationally-rooted; regional
division of labour blocs and states dominate

Politics Multilateralism; global civil society Inter-governmentalism; states dominate

matters world politics

Culture Rise of global popular culture; National/regional cultures resilient; no true

cosmopolitan identities global culture

Newness Relatively new phenomenon Just a new term for an old process

The book's position (Ritzer): Adopts a globalist position — there is such a thing as
globalization — but one sensitive to skeptics' concerns, especially about inequality and
uneven access.
(e) Globaphilia vs. Globaphobia
Globaphilia (pro-globalization view):
Economic growth benefits all ("rising sea raises all boats")
Globalization spreads democracy and civil society
Technological advancement improves lives
Figures like Thomas Friedman ("The World is Flat") argue it levels the playing field

Globaphobia (critical view):

Globalization widens the gap between rich and poor
Benefits flow disproportionately to the Global North and elites
Undermines democracy (corporate power over politics)
Noam Chomsky: opposed to neoliberal globalization specifically — favors "globalization
from below"
Conservative critics (e.g., Lou Dobbs): concerned about job losses, outsourcing,
immigration

Middle ground: Scholars like Jagdish Bhagwati and Guillermo de la Dehesa argue globalization
is "positive overall" but requires management and social policy to address its downsides.

(f) Globalization and the Liberal International Order (Kornprobst & Paul)
Since the end of World War II, globalization has been deeply connected to what is called the
Liberal International Order (LIO) — a rules-based international system built on:
Free trade (based on the belief that economic interdependence produces peace)
Democratization (democracy as the only legitimate form of government)
Global governance (multilateral institutions managing shared problems)
International institutions (UN, WTO, IMF, ICC, etc.)

The LIO fostered globalization, especially among Western allies. The "Washington Consensus"
promoted neoliberal economic policies globally. The belief in commercial peace — that
economic interdependence makes war too costly — underpinned decades of globalization.
Key empirical data: Global FDI peaked at $2 trillion in 2015, falling to $1.5 trillion by 2019, and
then by a further 42% in 2020 due to COVID-19.

3. THE CRISIS OF GLOBALIZATION (Bridge Section)

By the late 2000s, several contradictions within globalization began to generate serious
resistance. This "crisis" is the bridge between globalization and de-globalization.
Key Contradictions:
1. Rising Inequality
Global GDP grew from $84 trillion (2009) → $142 trillion (2019), but the richest economies
account for two-thirds of this
Within wealthy states, the distribution of wealth remains "extremely skewed" (Kornprobst
& Paul)
Piketty (Capital in the 21st Century): rising inequalities are a structural feature of
contemporary capitalism

2. The 2007–2009 Global Financial Crisis

Sparked debates about "peak finance" and "peak trade"
Van Bergeijk compares it to the Great Depression — "deglobalization 2.0"
Recovery was partial, generated new inequalities, and produced further instability

3. Democratic Recession
Freedom House (2021): 2020 was the 15th consecutive year of decline in global freedom
Nearly 75% of the world's population lived in a country that faced deterioration
Rise of democratic backsliding/authoritarianization — particularly in China, Russia,
Hungary, Turkey, Brazil

4. Populism and the "Davos Man" Backlash

2016 was a watershed: Brexit and Trump's election — events most did not predict
The Economist (2017): the era could see "globalization in retreat for the first time since
1945"
Populists argue: "globalization has benefited elites and penalized ordinary workers"
WEF Chair Klaus Schwab (2019): "a substantial part of society has become disaffected and
embittered… populism has become increasingly attractive"
Inglehart and Norris: rise of national populism driven by both economic factors (stagnant
wages, insecurity) and cultural factors (backlash against multiculturalism and
cosmopolitanism)

5. Eatwell & Goodwin's "Four Ds" of National Populism:

Distrust — of political elites and institutions
Deprivation — rising inequality, job insecurity
Destruction — of national cultures and ways of life
Dealignment — voters detaching from established parties
6. Failure of Global Governance (COVID-19 as Symptom)
China made "late and piecemeal" reports to the WHO
The US withdrew from the WHO during a global pandemic
Record refugee numbers not addressed collectively
Climate change commitments remain elusive

Conclusion of this section: The contradictions of globalization — inequality, democratic

recession, institutional failure, and populist backlash — collectively created the conditions
for de-globalization.

4. DE-GLOBALIZATION
(a) Meaning and Definition
De-globalization refers to the slowdown, reversal, or restructuring of global economic and
political integration. It is not simply the "opposite" of globalization but represents a shift in the
balance between globalizing and de-globalizing forces.
Scholars like O'Rourke and Williamson trace historical cycles:
Anti-global mercantilist restriction (1492–1820)
First global century (1820–1913)
Anti-global retreat (1913–1950)
Second global century (since 1950)
Current indications of a new global retreat

Even during globalization's heyday, authors like Barber noted the planet was "coming together
and falling apart at the same time." The concept of glocalization (Robertson, Ritzer)
acknowledged that localization and globalization always co-exist.

(b) Key Causes of De-globalization

Economic causes:
Rise of protectionism and trade barriers (tariffs, sanctions)
Decline in FDI flows globally
Disruption to global supply chains (COVID-19 exposed over-dependence)
"Reshoring" — bringing manufacturing back to home countries
National security concerns about economic dependence (e.g., semiconductors, rare earth
minerals)

Political causes:
 Rise of nationalism and economic nationalism — Brexit, Trump's "America First," India's
"Atmanirbhar Bharat"
Anti-liberal forces gaining electoral support in the US, Brazil, Hungary, Turkey, India
Protectionist policies breaking the supply chains of economic globalization
Authoritarian rulers (Xi Jinping, Putin) pursuing "hard-nosed policies abroad"

Institutional causes:
Weakening of multilateral institutions — WTO disputes, US withdrawal from WHO, Paris
Agreement
Decline of US leadership — Trump administration "took the lead in their destruction" of
liberal global governance norms
Growing contestation of international law and norms

Technological causes:
Digital fragmentation ("splinternet") — authoritarian governments forcing internet
shutdowns, censoring social media
China's "Great Firewall" as an example of national digital sovereignty

Pandemic effect (COVID-19):

The single most dramatic trigger for de-globalization in recent times
Exposed supply chain vulnerabilities
Introduced border closures, travel bans, vaccine nationalism
Reduced FDI by 42% in 2020 alone

(c) Dimensions of De-globalization

1. Economic De-globalization:
Decline in global trade as a share of GDP after 2008 peak
Shift away from long global supply chains toward regional or national production
Governments subsidizing domestic industries (e.g., US CHIPS Act, EU industrial policy)
Rise of bilateral/regional trade deals over multilateral ones (WTO paralysis)

2. Political De-globalization:
Reassertion of national sovereignty over international agreements
Rise of illiberal leaders who reject liberal international norms
Democratic backsliding making cross-border cooperation harder
China and Russia openly contesting the Western-led liberal international order
 "Wolf warrior diplomacy" by China — aggressive assertion of national interests

3. Technological De-globalization:
"Splinternet" — the global internet fragmenting along national lines
Bans on foreign technology companies (e.g., TikTok bans, Huawei restrictions)
National data localization laws
Competing AI and tech ecosystems (US vs. China)

4. Cultural De-globalization:
Resurgence of national identity and cultural protectionism
Backlash against cosmopolitan values — Theresa May: "If you believe you're a citizen of the
world, you're a citizen of nowhere"
Reassertion of territorial identities over hybrid/cosmopolitan ones

(d) De-globalization and Global Politics

De-globalization does not just affect economics — it fundamentally restructures world politics:
Weakening of multilateralism: States are less willing to defer to international institutions
Rise of Great Power competition: US-China rivalry threatens the cooperative framework
that enabled globalization. China's Belt and Road Initiative versus US-led alliance
structures
Power transition risks: Kornprobst & Paul warn that de-globalization could make power
transitions more conflictual — historically, rising powers that weren't accommodated
fought their way to prominence
North-South divide: Sinha identifies a new global North-South divide — emerging powers
(Global South) defend existing trade rules, while major powers in the North increasingly
turn against them
Refugee crisis: With investment flows to Africa, Asia, Latin America expected to halve,
millions could fall back into poverty, escalating refugee flows
Institutional decay: The ICC under pressure; Responsibility to Protect (R2P) rendered
defunct; WHO unable to coordinate COVID response

5. FLEW'S FRAMEWORK: NEO-GLOBALIZATION AND POST-GLOBALIZATION

Terry Flew (2020) provides a useful three-part framework for understanding the current
moment:
(a) The Globalization Paradigm's Weaknesses (Flew's Critique)
The globalization paradigm that dominated media and communication studies had two major
blind spots:
1. Underestimation of the nation-state — the state was declared "diminished" (Cable),
"hollowed out" (Strange), experiencing "declining sovereignty" (Hardt & Negri). But this
was wrong. Nation-states didn't shrink — government spending in 13 OECD nations rose
from 43.3% to 47.7% of GDP between 1980 and 2009.
2. Overestimation of cosmopolitan/post-national identities — globalization theorists
assumed cultural hybridity would replace national identity. But most international
migrants remain about 3% of global population (UN data), and the vast majority of people
stay in their birth countries. National identity remains powerful.

Key insight: Most MNCs are best understood as "national corporations with international
operations" rather than truly global entities (Dicken). Economic geographers confirm this.

(b) Neo-Globalization (Progressive/Reform Globalization)

Neo-globalization refers to proposals for reforming rather than reversing globalization. It is
associated with:
"Globalization from below" — social movements, NGOs, civil society
"Alter-globalization" — opposing neoliberal forms while supporting global solidarity
World Social Forum (WSF) — created in Porto Alegre in 2001 as a counter to the World
Economic Forum
Demands for democratic governance of global institutions, redistribution, and
environmental justice
Not anti-globalization — rather, pro-alternative-globalization

Distinction between:
"Globalization from above" — driven by nation-states and MNCs, especially from the
Global North; imposed on the South
"Globalization from below" — individuals and groups opposing and reshaping
globalization; counter-movements, alter-globalization

Example: The Italian-based Slow Food Movement — born in protest against a McDonald's in
Rome, now active in 100 countries. It is global in character but opposes the specific forms of
globalization from above that destroy local food traditions.
Global Civil Society (Kaldor) — NGOs, transnational advocacy networks, social movements —
as a third force alongside states and corporations. However, Flew cautions that the concept of
global civil society can be over-stretched and sometimes reflects elite cosmopolitan assumptions
rather than genuinely inclusive movements.

(c) Post-Globalization
Post-globalization does not mean the end of globalization. It refers to:
A reconfiguration of global relationships
Greater role of domestic political forces in shaping international arrangements
A world that remains highly interconnected but in new, different ways

Flew concludes: "The extent of global economic interdependence… makes the prospect of
economic autarky almost inconceivable." A full retreat to competing nationalisms is highly
unlikely.
More probable scenarios:
1. "Slowbalisation" (The Economist, 2019) — global integration continues but at a slower
pace than the 1990s–2000s
2. Competing populisms — domestic political pressures shape international arrangements
more directly; left and right populisms both critical of unregulated globalization
3. Greater nation-state regulation — especially of digital technology companies
4. "New medievalism" (Gilpin) — a scenario where non-state actors, sub-state actors, and
super-state actors multiply, though Flew considers this scenario overstated

6. POST-GLOBALIZATION: WHAT COMES NEXT?

(a) Features of a Post-Globalized World
Regionalization:
Global supply chains shortening — companies building regional rather than global chains
(e.g., "China+1" strategy in manufacturing)
Regional trade blocs gaining importance (RCEP in Asia, AfCFTA in Africa, USMCA in
North America)
The EU deepening integration even as global multilateralism weakens

Digital Globalization:
Even as physical flows slow, digital flows continue to accelerate
Data, services, and digital content increasingly cross borders
However, this coexists with "digital fragmentation" along national lines
Selective/Strategic Partnerships:
"Friend-shoring" — trading primarily with geopolitically aligned partners
Technology decoupling between US and China ("techno-nationalism")
Selective engagement rather than universal integration

Restructured Supply Chains:

"Just-in-time" giving way to "just-in-case" — building redundancy and resilience
Strategic domestic production in critical sectors (semiconductors, pharmaceuticals,
energy)

Reformed Welfare State (T.V. Paul's argument):

The domestic crises of liberal states — especially widening income inequality — are the
main cause of weakening of the liberal order internationally
Paul advocates a reformed welfare state to address the domestic roots of populism and de-
globalization
Key insight: De-globalization is partly a symptom of states failing their citizens
domestically

(b) Three Future Scenarios for the Liberal International Order (Kornprobst & Paul)
1. Resilience — the LIO adapts, addresses its contradictions, and survives in modified form
2. Decline — de-globalizing forces overwhelm the LIO; power transitions become more
conflictual
3. Transformation — a new international order emerges, possibly more multipolar, with
China playing a greater role (Belt and Road, tianxia system)

China's trajectory is crucial: its economy is four times the size it was in 1989 — built through
globalization. Now it is challenging the very rules-based order that enabled its rise.

7. CRITICAL ANALYSIS
Is De-globalization Real or Overstated?
De-globalization is real but partial:
Trade as % of GDP has stagnated post-2008 but not collapsed
FDI fell dramatically during COVID but is recovering in some sectors
Digital flows continue to grow massively
The world remains far more interconnected than it was in 1945
De-globalization is uneven:
It affects different countries differently (Global South particularly vulnerable to investment
decline)
It affects different sectors differently (manufacturing more affected than services; physical
trade more than digital)
It is stronger in rhetoric than in actual policy (most nations still trade heavily)

The globalization paradigm was always contested:

Globalization was never as total or uniform as its advocates claimed
Skeptics always pointed to large excluded populations, persistent national economies, and
the continued power of states
The current moment partly reflects a correction to the excesses of "hyperglobalization"

Key theoretical point: We should think of the current moment not as "de-globalization" in an
absolute sense, but as a shift from hyper-globalization (the 1990s–2000s model) to
controlled/managed globalization in which states, regions, and communities reassert greater
influence over the terms of integration.

8. KEY THINKERS AND THEIR POSITIONS (Quick Reference)

Thinker Key Contribution

Steger Definition of globalization; globality vs. globalization; five key definitions; multi-
dimensional approach

Ritzer Globalists vs. skeptics debate; globalizations (plural); globaphilia/globaphobia;

globalization from above/below

Kornprobst & Globalization-deglobalization-liberal international order nexus; three-cluster

Paul analysis of causes, effects, and futures

Flew Globalization paradigm's weaknesses; neo-globalization; post-globalization; nation-

state resilience

Giddens Globalization as intensification of worldwide social relations; action at distance vs.

nationalism

Robertson Glocalization; "compression of the world"; phases/epochs of globalization

Walden Bello Normative case for deglobalization; new world economy free of corporate logic

Piketty Rising inequality as structural feature of contemporary capitalism

 Thinker Key Contribution

Dani Rodrik Globalization has "gone too far" in undermining social stability; the nation-state
remains the only game in town

Eatwell & National populism; Four Ds (Distrust, Deprivation, Destruction, Dealignment)

Goodwin

T.V. Paul Reformed welfare state; widening inequality as root cause of liberal order weakening

Chomsky Against neoliberal globalization; favors globalization from below; globalization from
above serves elite interests

Friedman "The World is Flat" — globalization as levelling force; inevitabilist position

(Thomas)

9. IMPORTANT DATA POINTS (For Exam Use)

Global FDI: Peaked at $2 trillion (2015) → $1.5 trillion (2019) → fell 42% in 2020
World trade as % of GDP: 30% (1973) → 60% (2008) → 71% (2018)
Foreign affiliate assets grew 1,793% between 1990 and 2015
Internet users: 360 million (2000) → 4.1 billion (2018)
Freedom House: 15 consecutive years of global freedom decline as of 2020
75% of world population in countries with deteriorating freedom (2020)
Global GDP: $84 trillion (2009) → $142 trillion (2019); richest economies hold two-thirds
Migrants: ~3% of world population (200 million in 2010) — consistent since 1960s
In-work populist parties in Europe: ~5-7% votes in 1990s → ~25% today

10. CONCLUSION
Globalization is not disappearing — it is evolving. The arc from globalization to de-globalization
to post-globalization is best understood not as a linear decline, but as a dialectical process:
Globalization created the conditions for its own critique
De-globalization reflects the political and social costs of unmanaged integration
Post-globalization represents an attempt to reorder global relations on more sustainable,
equitable, and politically viable terms

What is ending is not globalization itself, but a specific model of globalization — the neoliberal,
US-led, hyperglobalized form that peaked in the 1990s and early 2000s. What is emerging is a
more fragmented, multipolar, contested form of global integration in which nation-states,
regional blocs, and domestic political pressures play a much larger role.
As Flew concludes: "The extent of global interconnectedness is now advanced to a point where a
retreat to competing national populisms is highly unlikely." But the reassertion of the national
into the global is real, consequential, and likely to define international politics for decades to
come.
The key takeaway for exams: De-globalization is a political response to the distributional
failures of globalization. Post-globalization is not the end of a global world, but the beginning of a
differently globalized one.

Sources: Steger (Globalization: A Very Short Introduction); Ritzer (Global Issues, Debates and
Controversies); Kornprobst & Paul (International Affairs, 2021); Flew (Global Media and
Communication, 2020)