Why would some groups of people be against globalisation and the organisations that promote globalisation e.g. WTO?


the world trade organisation



  1. Summarise the what, who, when, how and why of anti-globalization from the article above.
  2. Read the article above
  3. Which communities/groups associate themselves with this movement?
  4. What are the targets of anti-globalization movements?
  5. How did the anti-globalization movement begin?


The WTO riots, Seattle, US, 1999


the second age of globalisation is over?

  1. Read and highlight key quotes from the article above
  2. Include these quotes in the essay below


"Global interactions have made the world a richer place but not a fairer place." (15 points)

Mark scheme


Global participation has increased over time and core areas [Guide 3] have clearly expanded since the days of the Brandt Report. Developing peripheries [Guide 3] are places where a large emerging middle class can be found apparent, for example, NICs/BRICs. This economic fact does not need to be contested/debated. However, it could be by suggesting the 2008 credit crunch caused the expansion of world wealth to temporarily halt/reverse. It is also possible to critique other notions of “wealth”, such as cultural or ecological wealth, although, again, this is not a requirement.


This point does need to be debated, as it is controversial. Hundreds of millions have been lifted out of poverty in China although India is still a very divided society. It can be argued that global financial flows [Guide 3] have redistributed money on a regional level as world GDP has risen, with Asia, Brazil and some African (“African lion”) states clearly prospering at the aggregate level of GDP. But the benefits are still very uneven. Numbers in poverty in Saharan Africa have doubled over 30 years. Some financial flows (TNC profits, mining revenues etc.) are re-directed at core regions [Guide 3]. Good answers may debate the difficulties in finding a universally accessible definition of “fair” (or “wealth” for that matter).

There are also “unfair” losses for the environment in many places (an account of transboundary pollution could be employed here) and for local cultures as languages are lost etc. There are many possible approaches and these should be assessed on their merits.

To access band D, the answers should be well balanced. For band E, there should be an evidenced conclusion that has critically interrogated the idea of “fairness” with respect to the changing distribution of the growing total amount of global wealth.

examiner report

Less confident candidates sometimes chose to simply agree that the world is indeed an unfair place and did not, or could not, offer a counter-argument, whereas the strongest candidates knew plenty about the pros and cons of the actions and impacts of the IMF, the World Bank and SAPs (from strand 3 of the guide) and could therefore mount a proper assessment of how the opening up to global interactions of China and India (among others) had impacted on aggregate levels of wealth as well as on distributions (at varying geographical scales). The best answers provided strong evidence to support their arguments and could offer a wide interpretation of "fair" that allowed them to build a wider synthesis of ideas.