Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The paper delves into the complexities of globalization by considering the voices and agency of women. Globalization is rooted in local contexts, and women's unpaid and paid work plays a crucial role in producing the resources needed for global economic activities. Analyzing the impact of globalization on women and girls, along with their activism and resistance, can provide important insights for policy and institutional reforms aimed at mitigating its adverse effects. A viewpoint that takes into account women's needs and actions can help in answering not only the question, ‘How should we view globalization in a post-globalization era?’ but also in addressing another important question: as we advance towards post-globalization, is it possible to achieve inclusive, sustainable globalization?

Keywords

women's work globalization gender inequality intersectionality women's agency post-globalization

The article ‘How Should We Think About Globalization in a Post-Globalization Era?’ by Victor Roudemetof (2024) examines the theoretical landscape of globalization studies, presenting ideas to help develop a perspective on how to approach globalization in a post-globalization era. The article discusses the debate about the decline of globalization, suggesting that we are now in a ‘post-globalization’ era and that a new theoretical framework is needed to comprehend this phenomenon.

Considering that globalization can be analyzed from both macro and micro perspectives (Sun, 2021), the theoretical framework needed to understand this transition should highlight the impacts of globalization regarding the inclusion and exclusion of individuals and groups, as well as the agency of those who are affected by globalization processes. The relationship between transnational social change processes and social actors seems crucial for forecasting the future of globalization.

Globalization's impact is multifaceted, presenting both opportunities and significant challenges (see for example Bauman, 1998; European Commission, 2017; Held, 2004; Sassen, 1998). Among the beneficial aspects, one can identify: the creation of job opportunities (in 2019, more than 38 million jobs – one in five – in the EU were supported by exports to countries outside the EU (European Parliament, 2023); the chance for economic advancement in marginalized nations; the heightened competition that lowers the prices of goods and services for consumers; enhancement of communication channels; the increasing cultural exchanges and scientific collaboration that have fostered creativity and expedited innovation (European Commission, 2017; European Parliament, 2023; OECD, 2007).

Globalization also brings negative consequences, including income inequality, unequal access to healthcare and education, environmental degradation and cultural homogenization. The 2022 World Inequality Report Report (Chancel et al., 2022) explains that contemporary global inequalities are close to early twentieth-century levels, at the peak of Western imperialism. Income and wealth disparities have increased almost universally since the 1980s, due to a range of deregulation and liberalization initiatives that manifested differently across various nations (Chancel et al., 2022: 11). Globalization also involves the reorganization of power, as transnational institutions and multinational corporations gain unprecedented influence over local and national policies (ILO-World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization, 2002; Sassen, 2001). Local customs, traditions, and identities are increasingly subordinated to Western values, norms, and consumer practices (Appadurai, 1996; Tomlinson, 1999). This can result in tensions between global forces and local communities, leading to more conservative social norms.

Given the intricate nature of globalization, a major challenge is to comprehend how a progressively globalized world affects the rights and situations of historically marginalized groups, especially women, as well as to grasp their agency and capacity to resist those adverse effects. As Sassen notes (1998), the dominant narrative of globalization emphasizes hypermobility, global communications and the neutralization of place and distance, but it fails to consider that the global economy depends upon work done in particular places by particular persons. Women are essential in generating the resources required for global economic activities through their daily work. They not only increasingly join the workforce but also perform the majority of care work. The ILO's (2018) estimates derived from time-use survey data across 64 countries show that women perform 76.2% of the total amount of unpaid care work, 3.2 times more time than men. Worldwide, unpaid caregiving duties are most demanding for girls and women in middle-income nations, particularly those who are married, of adult age, have lower educational qualifications, live in rural areas, and have children under school age (ILO, 2018: 3–4). In most OECD countries, women's disproportionate hours spent on unpaid work result in women spending more hours in total on combined paid and unpaid work (OECD, 2017).

Examining the effects of globalization on girls and women, as well as their activism and resistance, can offer valuable insights for policy and institutional changes intended to alleviate its negative consequences. A perspective that considers women's needs and actions can assist in addressing not only the question ‘How should we consider globalization in a post-globalization era?’, but also tackling another crucial question: as we move towards post-globalization, can inclusive, sustainable globalization be achieved?

Globalization and gender inequalities

In what ways is globalization impacting women? Does globalization exert a predominantly positive or negative influence on women's lives? There are no easy answers to these questions.

It has generally been argued that globalization impacts women in varied ways across different regions globally, with some being more at risk than others (such as poor/marginalized women in wealthy countries, women from the Global South and indigenous women). Additionally, there is a general consensus that the effects can encompass both beneficial and detrimental elements (Frostell, 2002; Gray et al., 2006; Sánchez-Apellániz et al., 2012), and no research on globalization and women presents an entirely optimistic perspective.

The optimistic school (but with some reservations) argues that the integration of national economies with the global economy will improve the situation of all citizens, including women. Globalization is favourable for economic growth in the medium and long term due to trade openness, new market opportunities, foreign direct investment and the spread of ICTs (Kahai and Simmons, 2005). Trade theory suggests that a growing international trade should benefit women, especially in developing countries, by increasing their labour force participation (Bussmann, 2009). The countries most open to trade also have better economic rights for women and a lower incidence of forced labour (Hallward-Driemeier, 2011). International multinationals provide higher-paying employment opportunities for women, and the rise in investment needs from these companies could lead to enhanced educational opportunities. Women's greater economic independence and improved access to information may also underpin shifts in existing gender roles and norms, promoting more egalitarian views (World Bank, 2012).

In this framework, it has been suggested (Thorin, 2001: 13) that globalization cannot have a neutral impact on women and men, i.e. be equally positive or negative, because pre-existing conditions are biased against women, policy-making institutions neglect the gendered outcomes of globalization, and economic growth is dependent upon women's unpaid reproductive work and gender wage inequality. Unpaid caregiving is the primary obstacle to women's involvement in labour markets, whereas a more equitable distribution of unpaid care responsibilities between men and women correlates with increased women's labour force participation. According to ILO (2018: 5), 647 million working-age individuals are not in the labour force because of family obligations: among them, 606 million working-age women indicated they were unavailable for employment or not seeking a job due to unpaid caregiving, while only 41 million men are inactive for the same reason.

Moreover, women across the globe are often concentrated in poorly paid, low-skill, informal jobs, and are frequently exposed to harsh working conditions, exploitation, and multiple types of violence. Occupational sex segregation has continued to exist even with economic advancement and is fundamentally embedded in gender norms that influence the choices of both women and their employers (Elson and Seth, 2019). For example, women are often the majority of workers at the bottom of global supply chains. As multinational companies pursue lower labour costs and higher profit margins, women frequently become the most susceptible to exploitation in international supply chains. This occurrence is especially evident in the clothing industry, where female workers, mainly from Asian and African countries, hold the lowest positions in the labour hierarchy. These women encounter detrimental working conditions, inadequate pay, and insufficient legal safeguards, which worsen existing gender inequalities in income, health, and educational opportunities (Barriento et al., 2017).

Women's agency

Several scholars (see for example Davids and van Driel, 2005; Eschle, 2005; OECD, 2023; Snyder, 2006) have underlined that women are not only passively hit by globalization but also active agents that can challenge existing gender gaps. In response to the inequalities exacerbated by globalization, there has been a significant rise in global advocacy for women's rights. One of the implications of globalization is both the proliferation of women's movements at the local level and the emergence of transnational feminist networks (TFNs) working at the global level (Baksh and Harcourt, 2015; Moghadam, 2000, 2005; Walby, 2002). Interaction among feminist groups has been facilitated, particularly from the 1990s, by the new communications and information technologies that facilitated the creation of multicultural and multi-religious networks. Transnational events also played a key role in facilitating interaction and communication among feminist organizations: the World Conferences on Women convened by the United Nations in the last quarter of the twentieth century gave opening spaces for different feminists from all over the world.

Transnational Feminism is however a complex phenomenon, and not only in that it is inspired by a wide range of interdisciplinary perspectives. The movement is motivated by conflicting forces: simultaneously driven by globalization while resisting it. It expresses both disconnection (between Western Feminism and Feminism from the Global South), and connection (among feminists in the colonized and postcolonial contexts) (Salem, 2019). The term ‘transnational’ marks a shift from the concept of ‘global’ Feminism. Transnational Feminism challenges the notion of a global sisterhood (Morgan, 1984), which often stems from white, middle-class, Western feminist viewpoints. These viewpoints have often overlooked non-Western cultures and needs, and specifically the experiences of women in the Global South (Mohanty, 2003), portraying white women from the Global North as rescuers of their marginalized ‘sisters’ (Dutt-Ballerstadt and Anderson, 2022; Nadkarni and Gooptu, 2021).

Transnational Feminism faces numerous challenges (Ferree and Tripp, 2006). For instance, if global media have emerged as a key arena for strategy development, then, as Tohidi (2005) points out, the concerns faced by women lacking Internet access or transnational connections are ignored or overshadowed by better-educated, mostly English-speaking, and more privileged women, who can travel, participate in conferences, and access online spaces. An additional challenge relates to the concept of universality: universal problems faced by all women should not overshadow the specific circumstances, inequalities, challenges, and activism of different women at both local and national levels (Fernandes, 2013; Herr, 2013; Mohanty, 2003). Another issue pertains to the function of NGOs within TFNs: according to some researchers (Bernal and Grewal, 2014; Lang, 1997), the increase in NGOs has fragmented and depoliticized women's political efforts, especially in the Global South. As suggested by Mukhopadhyay (2014), transnational feminist politics should resist assimilation in global agendas through a re-energized politics of recognition and redistribution.

Is an inclusive, sustainable globalization possible?

Two questions inspired this paper: ‘How do we view globalization in a post-globalization context?’, and ‘As we advance towards post-globalization, can inclusive, sustainable globalization be achieved?’. A gender-sensitive approach may help us address both questions.

On a theoretical level, by analyzing the impact of globalization on women's lives – especially in emerging countries – one can fully understand the limitations of the current global economic order. As was noted, the benefits of globalization are not uniformly distributed. Girls and women caught at the intersection of traditional gender inequalities (care responsibility, education, time availability, access to productive resources) and the new dynamics created by globalization, may end up lagging behind both men and women who have successfully capitalized on trade openness, technological advancements, and access to information (World Bank, 2012).

To unravel the mechanisms of globalization more concretely, an intersectional perspective is needed. Intersectionality is a concept used to illustrate how different types of disadvantage or inequality can interact and lead to unique challenges and obstacles that are not always recognized through traditional perspectives (Collins, 2019; Crenshaw, 1989). Intersectionality explains that the causes of disadvantage or discrimination (such as sexism, ageism, racism, xenophobia, ableism, homophobia, and transphobia) do not exist independently, but form an interlocking system that shapes a person's life course. The challenge is to incorporate overlapping complex inequalities into the foundation of social theory regarding globalization, recognizing how a person might encounter and need to combat various forms of discrimination at the same time (Peterson, 2009; Walby, 2009).

On a policy level, addressing gender inequality is essential to promote a more inclusive global integration: gender-sensitive policies benefit not only women since women are among those most severely affected by the negative consequences of globalization. Programs and policies for gender equality can mitigate the exclusionary practices inherent in neoliberal globalization and result in improved outcomes, institutions, and policy choices (World Bank, 2012).

To foster a more inclusive globalization, it is essential that the voices of women, particularly those from marginalized communities, are integrated into the global discourse (Kerr and Sweetman, 2003). Women are key actors for change, as they embody the strongest link between global and local dimensions. In every country across the globe (regardless of cultural and lifestyle variations), girls and women are responsible for the acquisition and use of resources to meet daily needs: they take care of the food, water, nutrition, and energy needs of individuals and family groups (they procure water and food, cook and store it, collect firewood), manage farmland, care for livestock and support the forest economy). In addition to these tasks, is the care work provided daily and worldwide to children, family members, the elderly, the ill, and those with disabilities. Women also play a crucial role in environmental conservation, acting not just as key stakeholders, but also leading community organizations and advocacy efforts related to environmental protection (OECD, 2021). Thus, women are key actors in the process of reevaluation of the principles and practices of globalization in response to critiques about its effects on equality, social justice, and environmental sustainability.

The post-globalization landscape presents both opportunities and challenges. A comprehensive understanding of the gender dimension of globalization is essential for guiding policies and practices intended to advance equality and inclusion. Worldwide efforts should prioritize regions and communities where gender disparities are greatest, acknowledging that merely achieving growth does not ensure well-being and sustainability.

Footnotes

Declaration of conflicting interests

The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author received no financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Elisabetta Ruspini

References

Appadurai

(1996) Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Baksh R and Harcourt W (eds) (2015) The Oxford Handbook of Transnational Feminist Movements. New York: Oxford University Press.

Barrientos S, Bianchi L and Berman C (2017) Women workers in global supply chains: Rights and remedy. https://pure.manchester.ac.uk/ws/portalfiles/portal/63552201/Women_workers_briefing_paper.pdf

Bauman

(1998) Globalization. The Human Consequences. New York: Columbia University Press.

Bernal

Grewal

(Eds) (2014) Theorizing NGOs: States, Feminisms, and Neoliberalism. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Bussmann

(2009) The effect of trade openness on women’s welfare and work life. World Development 37(6): 1027–1038.

Chancel

Piketty

Saez

, et al. (2022) World Inequality Report 2022, World Inequality Lab: https://wir2022.wid.world/www-site/uploads/2023/03/D_FINAL_WIL_RIM_RAPPORT_2303.pdf

Collins

(2019) Intersectionality as Critical Social Theory. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Crenshaw KM (1989) Demarginalizing the intersection of race and sex: A black feminist critique of antidiscrimination doctrine, feminist theory and antiracist politics. University of Chicago Legal Forum 1989(1), Article 8. http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/uclf/vol1989/iss1/8

10.

Davids

van Driel

(2005) The Gender Question in Globalization: Changing Perspectives and Practices. Aldershot: Ashgate.

11.

Dutt-Ballerstadt R and Anderson K (2022) Transnational feminisms, 1 June. https://open.oregonstate.education/womenworldwide/chapter/transnational-feminisms/

12.

Elson

Seth

(eds) (2019) Gender Equality and Inclusive Growth: Economic Policies to Achieve, Sustainable Development. New York: UN Women: https://www.unwomen.org/sites/default/files/Headquarters/Attachments/Sections/Library/Publications/2019/Gender-equality-and-inclusive-growth-en.pdf

13.

Eschle

(2005) Skeleton women’: Feminism and the antiglobalisation movement. Signs: Journal of Women in Culture and Society 30(3): 1741–1760.

14.

European Commission: Directorate-General for Communication (2017) Reflection Paper on Harnessing Globalisation. Publications Office: https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2775/41851

15.

European Parliament (2023) Benefits of economic globalisation in Europe: facts and figures. Article 17-07-2023: www.europarl.europa.eu/pdfs/news/expert/2019/6/story/20190603STO53520/20190603STO53520_en.pdf

16.

Fernandes

(2013) Transnational Feminism in the United States: Knowledge, Ethics, and Power. New York: New York University Press.

17.

Ferree

Tripp

(2006) Global Feminism: Transnational Women's Activism, Organizing, and Human Rights. New York: New York University Press.

18.

Frostell

(2002) Globalisation and the Human Rights of Women. Åbo Akademi University: Institute for Human Rights), https://www.abo.fi/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/2002-Frostell-Globalisation-and-the-HR-of-women.pdf

19.

Gray

Kittilson

Sandholtz

(2006) Women and globalization: A study of 180 countries, 1975–2000. International Organization 60(2): 293–333.

20.

Hallward-Driemeier

(2011) Improving the Legal Investment Climate for Women in Sub-Saharan Africa. Washington, DC: World Bank.

21.

Held

(Ed) (2004) A Globalizing World? Culture, Economics, Politics. London: Routledge.

22.

Herr

(2013) Third world, transnational, and global feminisms. In: Mason

(eds) Encyclopedia of Race and Racism, II edition. London: Routledge, 190–195.

23.

Kahai

Simmons

(2005) The impact of globalization on income inequity. Global Business and Economics Review 7(1): 1–15.

24.

Kerr

Sweetman

(Eds) (2003) Women Reinventing Globalisation. Oxford: Oxfam GB.

25.

ILO (2018), Care Work and Care Jobs for the Future of Decent Work (Executive Summary). Geneva: ILO: https://www.ilo.org/sites/default/files/wcmsp5/groups/public/%40dgreports/%40dcomm/%40publ/documents/publication/wcms_633166.pdf

26.

ILO-World Commission on the Social Dimension of Globalization (2004) A fair globalization: Creating opportunities for all. Geneva, Switzerland: International Labour Organisation. https://webapps.ilo.org/public/english/wcsdg/docs/report.pdf

27.

Lang

(1997) The NGOization of feminism. In: Scott

Kaplan

Keates

(eds) Transitions, Environments, Translations: Feminisms in International Politics. New York: Routledge, 101–117.

28.

Moghadam

(2000) Transnational feminist networks. Collective action in an era of globalization. International Sociology 15(1): 57–85.

29.

Moghadam

(2005) Globalizing Women. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

30.

Mohanty

(2003) Under western eyes” revisited: Feminist solidarity through anticapitalist struggles. Signs 28(2): 499–535.

31.

Morgan

(Ed) (1984) Sisterhood is Global: The International Women's Movement. Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.

32.

Mukhopadhyay M (2014) Gendered citizenship in the postcolony: The challenge for transnational feminist politics. In: Baksh R and Harcourt W (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Transnational Feminist Movements. Oxford Academic, 607–626. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199943494.013.33

33.

Nadkarni A and Gooptu S (2021) Transnational feminism. In: Literary and Critical Theory. Oxford, UK: Oxford Bibliographies. DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780190221911-0006

34.

OECD (2007) The Costs and Benefits of Globalisation. In: Staying Competitive in the Global Economy: Moving Up the Value Chain. Paris: OECD Publishing.

35.

OECD (2017) Gender Inequality in Unpaid Work. In: The Pursuit of Gender Equality: An Uphill Battle. Paris: OECD Publishing.

36.

OECD (2021) Gender and the Environment: Building Evidence and Policies to Achieve the SDGs. Paris: OECD Publishing.

37.

OECD (2023) SIGI 2023 Global Report: Gender Equality in Times of Crisis, Social Institutions and Gender Index. Paris: OECD Publishing.

38.

Peterson

(2009) Interactive and intersectional analytics of globalization. Frontiers 30(1): 31–40.

39.

Roudometof V (2024) How should we think about globalization in a post-‘globalization’ era? Dialogues in Sociology. https://doi.org/10.1177/29768667241293053.

40.

Sánchez-Apellániz

Núñez

Charlo-Molina

(2012) Women and globalization. In: Wankel

Malleck

(eds) Ethical Models and Applications of Globalization: Cultural, Socio-Political and Economic Perspectives. Hershey, PA: Business Science Reference, 119–140.

41.

Salem

(2019) Transnational Feminist Solidarity in a Postcolonial World [Online]. The Sociological Review Magazine: https://thesociologicalreview.org/collections/politics-of-representation/transnational-feminist-solidarity-in-a-postcolonial-world/

42.

Sassen S (1998) Globalization and Its Discontents: Essays on the New Mobility of People and Money. New York: New Press.

43.

Sassen

(2001) The Global City. New York, London, Tokyo: Princeton University Press.

44.

Snyder

(2006) Fostering transnational dialogue: Lessons learned from women peace activists. Globalizations 3(1): 31–47.

45.

Sun J (2021) Micro globalization: Methodological consideration (----How did the new coronavirus achieve its global pandemic?). International Journal of Arts, Humanities & Social Science 2(9): 27-37.

46.

Thorin

(2001) The Gender Dimension of Globalisation: A Review of the Literature with a Focus on Latin America and the Caribbean. In: CEPAL Serie Comercio Internacional, 17, Division of International Trade and Integration. Santiago, Chile: United Nations Publications.

47.

Tohidi

(2005) Contribution to the Rountable Transnational Feminism: A Range of Disciplinary Perspectives (UCLA International Institute): https://www.international.ucla.edu/asia/article/28482

48.

Tomlinson J (1999) Globalization and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

49.

Walby

(2002) Feminism in a global age. Economy and Society 31(4): 533–557.

50.

Walby S (2009) Globalization and Inequalities. Complexity and Contested Modernities. London: Sage Publications.

51.

World Bank (2012) Globalization’s impact on gender equality: What’s happened and what’s needed. In: World Development Report 2012: Gender Equality and Development. Washington, DC: World Bank, chapter 6, 254–278.