Lesson 7: ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION AND SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT

OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this lesson, you shall be able to:
1. Define global food security
2. Critique existing models of global food security
3. Differentiate stability from sustainability
4. Articulate models of global sustainable development

Food security, as defined by the United

Nations' Committee on World Food Security,
means that all people, at all times, have physical,
social, and economic access to sufficient, safe,
and nutritious food that meets their food
preferences and dietary needs for an active and
healthy life.
Over the coming decade, a changing
climate, growing global population, rising food
prices, and environmental stressors will have
significant yet uncertain impacts on food security.
Adaptation strategies and policy responses to global change, including options for handling
water allocation, land use patterns, food
trade, postharvest food processing, and food
prices and safety are urgently needed. Work
on food security includes analysis of cash
transfers, promotion of sustainable
agricultural technologies, building resilience
to shocks, and managing trade-offs in food
security, such as balancing the nutritional
benefits of meat against the ecological costs
of its production.
https://www.ifpri.org/topic/food-
security#:~:text=Food%20security%2C%20as%20defined%20by,an%20active%20and%20healthy%20
life.

Models of Global Food Security

 Although they look and sound similar, the words stability and sustainability have
different meanings, but they do complement each other in the world of economics.
Stability means something is at a state wherein very little or no movement can be
detected, and even when a strong force is exerted toward its direction, it only serves to
prove its reliability. When we put this example into Economic terms, we may be talking
about a nation’s resilience to the different economic climates. A stable economy is
adaptable and well prepared for any disturbance, it means it has placed safeguards to
ensure its ability to weather any financial crisis.

Now, Sustainability plays a big part of what keeps the economy stable. It means that
the government has checked all the circles and have prepared many of the basic needs of the
population. They have made steps to ensure the consistency of having supplies and services.
So, Stability is the ability to adapt to unexpected changes, while sustainability deals
more with ensuring continuity.
https://brainly.ph/question/1859767
Stability can be a feature of a sustainable system but is not necessarily. While
stability is a way to characterize system behavior (often with one, sometimes more
variables), and is quite well bounded to certain methods in dynamic system analysis,
sustainability is a broader normative term. In order to be meaningful, sustainability has also
to be linked to time scale and a set of important response variables (at least 2, often more).
With the 'importance' the normative notion steps in: People define what values they want
to preserve, from the environmental, economic or social sector. They can for example define
instability as a valuable feature of other states so that their own economy 'sustainably'
flourishs. So, for both terms it is always important to ask 'of what?' and 'for how long?'.
Finally, the context of these terms is quite different: While stability is analysed in quite
confined systems, sustainability can hardly be used as solely ecological feature without
considering human perception and impact. https://faqs.tips/post/what-is-the-difference-
between-stability-and-sustainability-in- ecology.html

3 Sustainability Models
As sustainability champions, we are sometimes confronted by frustrated people who
ask what we mean by “sustainability.” What they really want to know is
sustainability’s relevance to them, their organization, or their community. Is it a
threatening concept, or a friendly one? Or maybe it’s just a fancy, multiple-syllable word
for something to which they are already paying attention, at least partially?
As we attempt to clarify others’ perceptions
and misconceptions, it is helpful to have a few definitions
and models in our toolkit to facilitate the discussion. The
1987 Report of the Brundtland Commission, Our
Common Future, defined sustainable development as,
“meeting the needs of the present generation without
compromising the ability of future generations to meet
their own needs.” To supplement that touchstone
definition and others, here are three sustainability
models that might help explain what a sustainable society
looks like.

3-legged stool model For years, I have used the adjacent slide to illustrate the
common three dimensions of sustainability: economic, environmental, and social / cultural.
The 3-legged stool metaphor reinforces the three dimensions that are required for us to
enjoy a high quality of life— and shows that society is unstable if one of them is weak. The
downside of this metaphor is that the economic, environmental, and social legs look
separate and equal.

Some people add a fourth leg / dimension: culture. I see culture as intertwined with
the social leg, but organizations like Living Principles divide the social aspect into people and
culture. They define the people dimension as, “actions and issues that affect all
aspects of society, including poverty, violence, injustice, education, healthcare, safe
housing, labor and human rights,” and the culture dimension as “actions and issues that
affect how communities manifest identity, preserve and cultivate traditions, and develop
belief systems and commonly accepted values.” Living Principles refer to the economy,
environment, people, and cultures as sustainability “streams.” Others refer to three or
four “pillars” of sustainability. Metaphors abound.
3-overlapping-circles models. The overlapping-circles model of sustainability
acknowledges the intersection of economic, environmental, and social factors. Depending
on our mindset, we re-size the circles to show that one factor is more dominant than the
other two. For example, some business leaders prefer to show the economy as the largest
circle because it is the most important to their success and it makes their world go round.

They draw society as the second largest circle because that is where their customers
and other important stakeholders live. The environment would then be the smallest
because it is the most external to standard business metrics. Unfortunately, this model
implies that the economy can exist independently of society and the environment—that the
part of the red circle that does not overlap with the blue and green circles has an existence
of its own. This large incongruity leads us to the next, more accurate model.
3-nested-dependencies modelIf you were to ask a maritime fisherman whether the
devastating collapse of the cod fishery off the east coast of Newfoundland was an
environmental disaster, a social disaster, or an economic disaster, he would say, “Yes.”
The 3-nested-dependencies model reflects this co-dependent reality. It shows that human
society is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the environment—that without food, clean water,
fresh air, fertile soil, and other natural resources, we’re cooked.

It’s the people in societies who decide how they will exchange goods and
services. That is, they decide what economic model they will use. Because they create their
economies, they can change them if they find their current economic models are not
working to improve their quality of life. To add another metaphor: the economy is the tail
and society is the dog— not vice versa.
To be fair, the society-economy relationship is symbiotic. During the recent
recession, the economic downturn had a significant impact on people’s quality of life.
Good jobs are so important to a vibrant modern-day society that sustainability champions
who portray the economy as subservient to society are sometimes accused of being
naïve about how the “real world” works.
It might be useful to use the picture of Earth in the adjacent slide to remind some
critics about the real “real world.” This defining photo shows water, atmospheric clouds,
and land—the environment. The photo also reminds us of a stark reality—there is no
umbilical cord going somewhere else; we must live within the carrying capacity of the
planet. We can’t see them in the photograph, but clusters of people on land form societies
within that larger environment. And, it’s those societies which decide how they will
exchange goods and services within and between themselves—their invisible economies.
The 3-nested- dependencies model reflects this reality.

Let’s return to the original question: what is the relevance of these models to
companies and their journey toward becoming sustainable enterprises? We will explore that
relevance in my next series of blogs. We’ll review the 5-stage sustainability journey that
organizations take to become sustainable enterprises. Then, we’ll use the 3-nested
dependencies model to: assess why today’s business paradigm is unsustainable; outline
what a sustainable business model would look like; and show the key steps that companies
take towards that more desirable state. https://sustainabilityadvantage.com/2010/07/20/3-
sustainability-models/

Things To Do

Name: Date:
Section/Year: Score:

Instructions:

A. Cite 5 scenarios showing food abundance and starvation. You can conceptualize your
ideas through drawings.

Food Abundance Food Starvation

B. Write a critique on the existing models of global food security

Observations:
Supply Demand

- airead”.' tpe nieliy i inEorpor31ed in studies

Three pillars of Food security

Production
C. Differentiate stability from sustainability

Stability Sustainability
D. Explain the model of global sustainable development. Write it beside the model.
Lesson 8: ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION, POVERTY AND INEQUALITY

OBJECTIVES:
At the end of this lesson, you shall be able to:
1. Define the term “Global South”
2. Differentiate the Global South from the Third World
3. Analyze how a new conception of global relations emerged from the experiences
of Latin

The Global South is an emerging term, used by the World Bank and other
organizations, identifying countries with one side of the underlying global North–
South divide, the other side being the countries of the Global North. ... The overwhelming
majority of these countries are located in or near the tropics.
The term was first introduced as a more open and value free alternative to "third
world" and similar valuing terms.
Countries of the Global South have been described as newly industrialized or in the
process of industrializing, are largely considered by freedom indices to have lower-
quality democracies, and frequently have a history of colonialism by Northern,
often European states. The countries Brazil, India, China, Mexico, and Indonesia have the
largest populations and economies among Southern states. The overwhelming majority of
these countries are located in or near the tropics.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_South#:~:text=The%20Global%20South%20is%20an,countries
%20of%20the%20Global%20North.&text=The%20overwhelming%20majority%20of%20these,in%20
or%20near%20the%20tropics.

The phrase “Global South” refers broadly to the regions of Latin America, Asia,
Africa, and Oceania. It is one of a family of terms, including “Third World” and
“Periphery,” that denote regions outside Europe and North America, mostly (though not all)
low-income and often politically or culturally mar- ginalized.
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1536504212436479

Many times there is a clear distinction between First and Third Worlds. . .People refer
to the two as "Third World/South" and "First World/North" because the Global North is more
affluent and developed, whereas the Global South is less developed and often poorer
 Since 1990 the term "Third World" has been redefined in many evolving dictionaries in
several languages to refer to countries considered to be underdeveloped economically and/or
socially. From a "political correctness" standpoint the term "Third World" may be considered
outdated, which its concept is mostly a historical term and cannot fully address what means by
developing and less-developed countries today. Around the early 1960s, the term
"underdeveloped countries" occurred and the Third World serves to be its synonym, but after it
has been officially used by politicians, 'underdeveloped countries' is soon been replaced by
'developing' and 'less-developed countries,' because the prior one shows hostility and disrespect,
in which the Third World is often characterized with stereotypes.[12] The whole 'Four Worlds'
system of classification has also been described as derogatory because the standard mainly
focused on each nations' Gross National Product. While the Cold War Period ends and many
sovereign states start to form, the term Third World becomes less usable. Nevertheless, it
remains in popular use around the world, including the Latin American Spanish-language media,
where "tercermundista" (an adjective) can refer to not just lower levels of development but
also something of low quality or in other ways deficient. The general definition of the Third World
can be traced back to the history that nations positioned as neutral and independent during the
Cold War were considered as Third World Countries, and normally these countries are defined by
high poverty rates, lack of resources, and unstable financial standing. However, based on the
rapid development of modernization and globalization, countries that were used to be
considered as Third World countries achieve big economic growth, such as Brazil, India, and
Indonesia, which can no longer be defined by poor economic status or low GNP today. The
differences among nations of the Third World are continually growing throughout time, and it
will be hard to use the Third World to define and organize groups of nations based on their
common political arrangements since most countries live under diverse creeds in this era, such
as Mexico, El Salvador, and Singapore, which they all have their own political system. The Third
World categorization becomes anachronistic since its political classification and economic system
are distinct to be applied in today's society. Based on the Third World standards, any region of
the world can be categorized into any of the four types of relationships among state and
society, and will eventually end in four outcomes: praetorianism, multi-authority, quasi-
democratic and viable democracy. However, political culture is never going to be limited by the
rule and the concept of the Third World can be circumscribed.
Third World is often broadly connected to colonialism and poverty, but through
decolonization and evolution in transport and communications, the World is shrinking and each
nation forms a strong interlinkage with each other so that the 'Four Worlds' system is left behind
and the world is more likely to be considered as a united one. Moreover, the Four Worlds'
categorization also reinforces competition snd superiority among nations. The Third World is a
controversial topic, and "political correctness" in some media and academic settings insist that it
is no longer used very often although there are still many countries that share similar
developmental experiences. It has been partially replaced by developing countries and less-
developed countries, which they do not have obvious negative implications as the Third World.
However, the Latin American media continue to frequently employ the equivalent Spanish
language expression, "Tercer Mundo."
Tomlinson, B.R. (2003). "What was the Third World", Journal of Contemporary
History, 38(2): 307–321.
Wolf-Phillips, Leslie (1987). "Why 'Third World'?: Origin, Definition and Usage", Third
World Quarterly, 9(4): 1311-1327
Things To Do

Name: Date:

Section/Year: Score:

Instructions:

A. Define the term “Global South”

A.1 Why are they called “Global South”?

A.2 Is there a manifested influence of the “Global South”? How? Why?

B. Note down 5 differences of the Global South from the Third World
1.

2.
 3.

4.

5.

C. Global relations emerged from the experiences of Latin, explain why. Point out
important events that made them so using the sustainability models.