International organizations Gringo Trails Global governance Global governance or world governance is a social movement toward political integration of transnational actors aimed at solving problems that affect more than one state or region when there is no power of enforcing compliance. The modern question of world governance exists in the context of globalization. In response to the acceleration of interdependence on a worldwide scale, both between human societies and between humankind and the biosphere, the term "world governance" may also be used to designate laws, rules, or regulations intended for a global scale. Definition[edit] In a simple and broad-based definition of world governance, the term is used to designate all regulations intended for organization and centralization of human societies on a global scale.[1] Traditionally, government has been associated with "governing," or with political authority, institutions, and, ultimately, control. Usage[edit] Context[edit] Need[edit] Crisis of purpose[edit] World government[edit] Issues[edit]
Global Issues : social, political, economic and environmental issues that affect us all — Global Issues The Politics of Ontology: Anthropological Positions — Cultural Anthropology At first blush, “ontology” and “politics” make strange bedfellows. Ontology evokes essence, while politics, as modern, democratic, multiculturalist citizens tend to understand it, is about debunking essences and affirming in their stead the world-making capacities of human collectives. Yet this notion of a social construction of reality itself instantiates a particular ontology, and a powerful one at that—and here we also mean politically powerful. Still, as anthropologists we are attuned to the “powers of the weak”—to the many complex connections, some of them crucially negative, between power differences (politics) and the powers of difference (ontology). How might “the otherwise” be rendered manifest ethnographically? Second, the idea of an ontological self-determination of peoples should not be confused with supporting ethnic essentialization, Blut und Boden primordialism, and other forms of sociocultural realism. Notes References Alberti, Benjamin, and Yvonne Marshall. 2009.
Gini coefficient Gini coefficient of national income distribution around the world. This is based on 1989 to 2009 data, estimated by the CIA. Some are pre-tax and transfer, others post-tax income. The Gini coefficient (also known as the Gini index or Gini ratio) (/dʒini/) is a measure of statistical dispersion intended to represent the income distribution of a nation's residents. It was developed by the Italian statistician and sociologist Corrado Gini and published in his 1912 paper "Variability and Mutability" (Italian: Variabilità e mutabilità).[1][2] The Gini coefficient measures the inequality among values of a frequency distribution (for example levels of income). There are some issues in interpreting a Gini coefficient. Definition[edit] Graphical representation of the Gini coefficient The graph shows that the Gini coefficient is equal to the area marked A divided by the sum of the areas marked A and B. that is, Gini = A / (A + B). Calculation[edit] This may be simplified to: where and , then , so that
Globalization Globalisation (or globalization) is the process of international integration arising from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects of culture.[1][2] Advances in transportation and telecommunications infrastructure, including the rise of the telegraph and its posterity the Internet, are major factors in globalization, generating further interdependence of economic and cultural activities.[3] Though scholars place the origins of globalization in modern times, others trace its history long before the European age of discovery and voyages to the New World. Some even trace the origins to the third millennium BCE.[4][5] In the late 19th century and early 20th century, the connectedness of the world's economies and cultures grew very quickly. Overview[edit] Humans have interacted over long distances for thousands of years. Airline personnel from the "Jet set" age, circa 1960. Etymology and usage[edit] Sociologists Martin Albrow and Elizabeth King define globalization as:
Ecological anthropology Some societies have proven to be sustainable for centuries or even millennia. Others have degraded their habitat and depleted the natural resources in it to the extent of undermining their economic and social viability thereby leading to sociocultural disintegration and even collapse. Examples of sustainable societies are the highlanders of New Guinea, Inca of the Andes, Menominee in Wisconsin, Norse of Iceland, Pueblo of the southwestern region of the United States, San of southern Africa, Tikopia in the South Pacific, Tokugawa era Japan, Tonga in the South Pacific, and Yanomami in the Amazon between Brazil and Venezuela. Examples of unsustainable societies that eventually collapsed are the prehistoric Anasazi of the southwestern region of the United States, central Classic Lowland Maya of Central America, Norse of Greenland, and Rapanui (Easter Island) in the South Pacific. However, there is considerable controversy surrounding some cases, especially the Maya and Rapanui.
Externality In economics, an externality is the cost or benefit that affects a party who did not choose to incur that cost or benefit.[1] Implications[edit] External costs and benefits Voluntary exchange is considered mutually beneficial to both parties involved, because buyers or sellers would not trade if either thought it detrimental to themselves. A voluntary exchange may reduce societal welfare if external costs exist. On the other hand, a positive externality would increase the utility of third parties at no cost to them. There are a number of potential means of improving overall social utility when externalities are involved. Laissez-faire economists such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman sometimes refer to externalities as "neighborhood effects" or "spillovers", although externalities are not necessarily minor or localized. Examples[edit] Negative[edit] Barry Commoner commented on the costs of externalities: Positive[edit] Positional[edit] Inframarginal[edit] Technological[edit]
World debt comparison: The global debt clock Nature–culture divide The nature–culture divide, refers to a theoretical foundation of contemporary anthropology. Early anthropologists sought theoretical insight from the perceived tensions between culture, as a social entity, and nature, as a bio-physical entity. The argument became framed as to whether the two entities function separately from one another, or if they have a continuous biotic relationship with each other. Western and indigenous concepts[edit] In Western society nature and culture are conceptualized as dichotomous (separate and distinct domains of reference). Not all peoples make the distinctions between nature and culture, and for many the boundary is blurred. Sustainability[edit] It has been suggested that small scale-societies can have a more symbiotic relationship with nature. Indigenous knowledge has been proposed as a solution. Is female to male as nature is to culture? However, this can be seen in a different light in this context for those who deny women equal status alongside men.
Gross domestic product Gross domestic product (GDP) is defined by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) as "an aggregate measure of production equal to the sum of the gross values added of all resident, institutional units engaged in production (plus any taxes, and minus any subsidies, on products not included in the value of their outputs)."[2] GDP estimates are commonly used to measure the economic performance of a whole country or region, but can also measure the relative contribution of an industry sector. The more familiar use of GDP estimates is to calculate the growth of the economy from year to year (and recently from quarter to quarter). History[edit] The concept of GDP was first developed by Simon Kuznets for a US Congress report in 1934.[4] In this report, Kuznets warned against its use as a measure of welfare (see below under limitations and criticisms). The history of the concept of GDP should be distinguished from the history of changes in ways of estimating it.