In Chapter 3, you learned that stratification within the United States is the unequal distribution of economic and social resources among individuals and groups in the United States. This unequal distribution is based on one’s position in the social hierarchy, or strata of society.

The same principles apply in the study of global stratification, the unequal distribution of economic and social resources among the world’s countries. Sociologists study global stratification using three main lenses:

1. The unequal distribution of economic and social resources between countries.
2. The unequal distribution of economic and social resources within countries (internal inequality).
3. Measures within countries as compared with other countries.

These global views of inequality are studied and debated at length by sociologists, economists, and humanitarian aid and development professionals, among others. Each examines the concentration of resources within certain countries and among certain people and groups.

Let’s warm up to global stratification with an introduction. This 2:27-minute video, “If The World Were 100 People” [Streaming Video], is an animation that describes what society would look like if the population of the world was only 100 people. Pay attention to the global inequalities illustrated here (figure 4.2).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QFrqTFRy-LU

You likely noticed some extreme disparities in concentration of wealth and other resources. This is the source of stratification.

Next, let’s look at how stratification is related to globalization. Watch this 3:14-minute video, “What Is Globalization? Understand Our Interconnected World” [Streaming Video]” (figure 4.3). Pay attention to the causes and effects of globalization the film describes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wLNp3kgBuuQ

Global inequality and globalization have a complex and often disputed relationship. One way to look at the debate is through the views of what Ray Maghroori terms the “optimist globalists” and the “pessimist globalists” (Maghroori 1982). Proponents of globalization, the optimist globalists argue that globalization increases average income within countries as factory workers in poor countries are making much better wages than they would at other jobs available to them.

They see free trade as a tool to lower prices in wealthier countries and improve the economy of poorer countries. They point to the fact that globalization has allowed international aid agencies to respond more quickly to natural disasters, made advanced medicines more available to people, and provided more international educational opportunities to people around the world. They see that countries can better work together to find solutions to climate change and respond better to crimes, including wartime atrocities with international law systems.

Other thinkers, the pessimist globalists, point to globalization as the root cause of many of our global ills. They see that economic globalization, the global expansion of international capitalism, free markets, and the increase in international trade, has created greater inequality and poverty. They say it has also increased the rate of climate change, influenced the breakdown of democracies, and even caused higher rates of worldwide psychological depression.

They blame free trade and economic globalization for the unfair working conditions and loss of jobs within wealthy countries due to outsourcing. Cultural globalization, the cross-border exchange of ideas, attitudes, meanings, values, and cultural products, is also seen as destructive to local cultures because the expansion of Western culture reduces cultural diversity and creates one global culture. Pessimist globalists would also disagree with the video in figure 4.3, which posits that globalization can promote peace and security. They would point out ways that globalization fosters war and insecurity.

These debates reveal important questions about what we value. For example, we know that globalization has increased average income in all countries, but is average income our best evaluation of inequality? Standing alone, is income our best way to identify well-being?

The study of globalization, global stratification, and inequality encompasses all these questions, and thinkers continually evaluate new alternatives. For example, the economics of happiness is one alternative way of studying well-being. It is both a qualitative and quantitative study that elevates happiness and quality of life as an important identifier of well-being. That is, it has applied qualitative research, which works with non-numerical data and attempts to understand the experiences of individuals and groups from their own perspectives. It also applies quantitative research, which refers to research that uses numerical data.

In the following sections, we’ll examine global inequality in the context of globalization. To do so, we’ll focus on the increased interactions between countries economically, politically, and culturally.

Licenses and Attributions for The Study of Global Stratification and Globalization

Open Content, Original

“The Study of Global Stratification and Globalization” by Aimee Samara Krouskop is licensed under CC BY-SA 4.0.

All Rights Reserved Content

Figure 4.2. “If The World Were 100 People” by GOOD Magazine is licensed under the Standard YouTube License.

Figure 4.3. “What Is Globalization? Understand Our Interconnected World” by CFR Education is licensed under the Standard YouTube License.