This week our discussion focused on the impact of globilization and development on health. The economic benefits of globilization and a free market economy need to be balanced with the potential negative impacts on health. Once again we see that the people affected most by the potential negative consequences are the poor, who are at risk of becoming further marginalized through the process of globilization. Privitazation of health and education seem to be major contributors to the marginalization of poor populations by limiting their access to basic, essential health services and a quality primary education. To further compound the issue, as people beocme more marginalized, they become less and less powerful - their voices are not heard - their problems become "their problems". It's unfortunate, but true. As discussed this week in a another class, if we want to improve the health stauts of a country, start with the poor populations. So the reality is, their problems are not "their" problems, they are "our" problems. Fair and equitable health/education for the poor have to be part of the globilization discussion.
To that end, while the background video - "Globalisation is Good - Johan Norberg on Globalization" (available at http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5633239795464137680&q=globalization&hl=en ) does a great job of showing the positive outcomes related to globilization, I think the video falls short by failing to discuss the potential negative consequences. We cannot just focus on the positive benefits and ignore the negative. We have to talk about and plan for both in order to realize maximal benefits from globilization. What do you think ?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
I agree with you about the globalization video, Andrea. I didn't know what to make of it, because he used such arguments as "If enough people stop supporting Nike, this woman will lose everything." Didn't it seem like he was sponsored by at least one of those companies? He did make some points, however, that kind of hit home, like when he said we don't want "exotic" countries to become globalized because we want them to remain museums that we visit and can buy trinkets to take home. But all in all, it was pretty shocking in its bias.
I agree with both of you, though there were some valuable ideas to take away from the video, that there is another side for instance. I also think maybe we need to personalize the problems of the poor since people not in that position can not comprehend why it is not just "their problem".
I don't think most people can understand poverty until they see real poverty, like what I saw in Ghana, and I'm sure you have all seen it too in your experiences. You can show them pictures and tell them stories, but until they walk and talk with the people and try to understand their struggles, it's almost impossible to relate to. There are so many people who want to do good and want to help others. However, I don't think most understand that the majority of the poor don't want a charity handout...they want a real opportunity.
Andrea you are right and we must consider the negative aspect of globalization as well. As I mentioned during my case study facilitation we, as professionals in order to minimize the negative impact of globalization, should research globalization efforts in developed countries, communicate with public health experts of other countries in order to compare globalization progress in the country of focus and finally develop methods of educating people about the policies on globalization and health. I hope you liked my thoughts…
Liyan
p.s I really like your picture
Post a Comment