HOME - A must-see documentary!

A few months ago during my stay in London my attention was drawn to a wonderful documentary. Back then I decided to share this documentary with a bunch of people by using Facebook. Unfortunately I did not get the feedback I expected. Therefore I hope that maybe now, by using this media, this film will actually reach more people and get the attention it deserves.

I am talking about the project HOME by the French photographer and environmentalist Yann Arthus-Bertrand, well-known for its book project Earth from Above (‘La Terre vue du ciel’), a breathtaking collection of aerial shots of various places on Earth.

The documentary presents the viewer with an overview of the stunning diversity of life on our Planet, and shows how humanity is threatening the ecological balance of our Earth. The film was released in June of 2009, and is available for the public on YouTube. The movie has no copyright, and can be broadcasted on TV, copied, distributed, uploaded and burned on DVD without restrictions.

I hope you will enjoy watching this masterpiece the same way I did. It has a wonderful soundtrack by Armand Amar, a French of Moroccan origin, who composed music perfectly accompanying the beautiful aerial shots and educational text.

Please share the link of the documentary with your friends and family, and help contributing to an increased awareness of the effects of our consumption and lifestyle on our Earth.

Watch the documentary here.

(http://www.youtube.com/homeproject)

About the Marketing Activities of Multinational Corporations

Do the marketing activities of multinational corporations (MNC) undermine social stability, cultural identity and economic viability of local communities in threshold countries?

Globalization forces account for numerous changes affecting the economic, political, cultural, social and technological aspects of the worldwide business environment, and the lives of citizens and consumers around the world[1]. Globalization is defined by Andersen as “the decline in transaction costs or barriers to doing business or otherwise interacting with people of other nations around the world. Its effect is to enhance the integration of markets for goods, services, technology, ideas, capital and labour.”[2] The phenomenon of globalization encompasses trade and direct foreign investments (FDI) made by multinational corporations (MNCs)[3]. A multinational corporation “is a company that takes a global approach to foreign markets and production,”[4] and operates in more than one nation. The term MNC is used in business literature interchangeably with multinational enterprise and transnational company or corporation [5]. About 65,000 MNCs with 850,000 subsidiaries, employing 54 million people are operating across the globe, and generating sales of nearly US$19 trillion. The fact that two-thirds of the total global trade in goods and services is in the hands of MNCs, elucidates that multinationals are central actors in the creation of wealth [6]. But it also creates concern among developing countries. The increasing sense of domination by multinationals lies in their growing influence on the decline of sovereignty of nations,[7] especially in threshold countries. As the term threshold country is not widely used in business literature, the term developing or emerging country will be used instead. Low-income and middle-income nations are categorized by the World Bank as developing or emerging countries [8].

During the 1990’s many previously hostile governments of developing countries started to cooperate with MNCs driven by the belief that free market capitalism could ameliorate the living standards of citizens. Consequently, the main field of opposition to the activities of multinationals has shifted away from host countries towards local communities, making them the battlefield on which the activities of the corporations and its consequences are disputed [9]. Therefore, this paper will focus on the effects of multinationals on local communities, and present whether they will benefit or loose from FDI and global marketing activities made by large MNCs.

Global marketing involves the expansion of worldwide business horizons pursuing new market opportunities by allocating disposable resources to the greatest use creating value for stakeholders and customers. Globalization offers multinationals, from a marketing point of view, with infinite favourable conditions to grow and become greater, more efficient and competitive [10]. The marketing activities of MNCs have an impact on developing countries in two ways. Nowadays, large corporations focus on their heavily invested core expertise such as marketing and product design taking place in their home countries, outsourcing less profitable activities of their company such as manufacturing, sourcing and purchasing operations to emerging markets [11]. Furthermore, the marketing activities of MNCs have a direct effect on the communities of host countries. Marketing is interdependent with development and socioeconomic circumstances, and “its effects cannot be disentangled from the impact of the economic, political, social, and cultural system of which it is a part.”[12]. This paper is divided in three main sections, and explores the social, cultural and economic effects MNCs have on local communities in developing countries.

Positive and negative social, cultural and economic effects of MNCs

Globalization, “embodied in the practices of transnational corporations”[13], might generate new opportunities to emerging countries, as for example better access to global markets, quicken transfer of technology from the First World, enhanced efficiency and improved productivity. However, it simultaneously confronts developing nations with new challenges, such as labour malpractices and the degradation of the environment [14].

Advocates of globalization regard the trend of rising integration of worldwide national economies as paramount for fast economic growth and reduction of poverty, in both, developed and developing countries. Opponents of globalization on the other hand, believe that it increases poverty and the disparity between rich and poor, causes cultural homogenization and vanishing of local cultures, terrorism, expansion of fatal diseases and environmental decay [15] Globalization is regarded as a means for exploitation of the less powerful nations, and MNCs are considered the core problem for not benefiting the people living in the foreign countries, but taking advantage of them instead [16] The degree to which the effects of the activities of multinationals can be positive or negative for local communities of emerging markets will be presented hereafter.

Social stability – destabilized and solidified

According to anti-globalization critics, globalization is socially damaging, for it accentuates poverty in poor as well as in rich nations, hinders unionization and labour rights, causes harm to women,[17] and enhances the incentive to utilize child labour, contributing to its perpetuation and expansion [18].

Poverty

The number of people living in poverty in the Third World has increased steadily in the last decades, accompanied by a greater gap between rich and poor countries. Anti-globalization demonstrators criticise that most developed countries selfishly pursuit their own interests, at the cost of poor countries. For example, many developing countries still face protectionism in developed nations, while they have eradicated trade barriers to attract FDI. Protectionism imposed by the First World costs emerging countries according to the World Bank, more than US$100 billion per year, restraining emerging nations with exports which they urgently need [19].

Although the penetration of MNCs creates jobs in host countries, the degree to which it provides notable and permanent benefits to the population of the developing countries is debatable. It is argued that MNCs have not been able to deliver higher living standards over the last years, except in a small amount of newly industrialized nations, such as Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea [20] Growing global inequality, as well as reckless and unscrupulous practices of MNCs hinder the development of a sustainable worldwide business environment favourable for prosperity and growth. Consequently, the existing inequalities are aggravated, and developing countries are “forced deeper and deeper into the margins of global society.”[21]

But MNCs can also contribute to the amelioration of the standards of living of the poor in developing nations. Prahalad has drawn attention to the fact that MNCs “could radically improve the lives of billions of people and help bring into being a more stable, less dangerous world,” [22] by investing in the poorest markets of the world, stimulating commerce and progress. By targeting the bottom of the economic pyramid in developing nations and acting entirely in their own self-interests, multinational corporations can benefit, as well as local communities. [23] MNCs operating in emerging markets will gain access to millions of new consumers owning billions of dollars to spend. In Rio de Janeiro for example, the poor are estimated to have a buying power of US$1.2 billion. Local communities will benefit from the marketing activities of MNCs, by gaining access to basic goods and services that are able to minimize costs to the poor population and improve their living standards [24].

Child Labour

One major issue that MNCs face when getting involved in FDI or acquiring goods from subcontractors in emerging countries is child labour. The International Labor Organization (ILO) estimates that 250 million children aged between 5 and 17 work worldwide, often in conditions threatening their health or well-being. MNCs are challenged by alien legal, cultural and political policies, which often differ greatly from those familiar from the home country. Globalization is made responsible for exacerbating the life situation of children in emerging countries, by perpetuating and supporting the use of child labour [25].

However, it is observed that the problem of child labour has existed for centuries, and has been inherited throughout history, and hence it is not probable that it has much to do with the phenomenon of globalization. Furthermore, it is argued that there is not sufficient evidence of this harmful relationship. On the contrary, it is reported that globalization hastens the reduction of child labour and boosts education, resulting in fast economic growth [26]. In addition, it is concluded that multinationals are not able to completely eradicate child labour, especially because it is estimated that not more than 5 percent of child labour is used in export industries sustained by multinationals [27] One argument supporting child labour, it that if “children were not employed, they would be worse off.”[28] In the 1990s Bangladesh was obliged to detain the employment of children, but instead of improving the plight of the children, it was aggravated. About 5000 to 7000 girls moved from working in factories to prostitution, and were forced to work in informal economical sectors under even poorer conditions. Moreover, it was found that Nike and other MNCs have been able to considerably improve the working conditions of factory workers in emerging countries. It is pointed out, that if MNCs would not invest in developing nations, they would not be able to have any impact at all on the local working practices [29].

Wages and labour standards

Multinationals in developing countries are criticized for exploiting their workers, by paying low and unfair wages and violating their labour and human rights. Critics accuse MNCs and their subcontractors for paying wages below the common local remuneration in domestic companies or alternative jobs, and for disobeying local labour laws concerning safety and further working conditions [30]. The problem lies in the fact that governments of developing nations are forced to compete with each other deregulating their policies in order to attract FDI. Governments fear that if they raise the minimum wage and increase labour safety standards, they would loose FDI of multinationals, for they would seek other developing countries offering better business conditions [31]. Furthermore, governments in collaboration with multinationals are held responsible for lowering the power of trade unions, with the purpose of reducing worker protection and labour costs. In general, labour is becoming more vulnerable and uncertain due to the increment of short-term contracts, increasingly competitive labour markets and the deterioration of social security [32] In Columbia for example, Nestlé and Coca-Cola were accused of changing their investment strategies on the cost of their employees, by closing plants and subsidiaries, and shifting to temporal employment and subcontractors. During the last decade, Coca-Cola reduced the salary of temporal employees by 35 percent and the salary of employees of subcontractors by 60 percent. Moreover, multinationals in Colombia are accused of hindering unionization and violating human rights, with the help of paramilitaries. Multinationals intimidate the local communities and local workforce with the aid of paramilitaries, which use intimidations, kidnappings, threats, tortures and homicides, to oblige workers to quit trade unions or accept precarious working conditions. Coca-Cola and Nestlé were found directly or indirectly responsible for the assassination of 10 and 9 local citizens, respectively [33].

Advocates of globalization and MNCs argue, that low-skilled jobs in factories in emerging countries offer opportunities and income to workers, which is slightly higher that those found in local firms [34]. It is empirically proven that MNCs pay a wage premium, most often exceeding the prevalent wages up to 10 percent. U.S. MNCs are observed to sometimes pay even up to 40 to 100 percent the usual rate [35]. These wage premiums can be found in countries such as Venezuela, Morocco, Indonesia and the Ivory Coast [36]. Furthermore, there is no evidence that subcontractors of multinationals pay lower wages than local firms in alternative jobs. On the contrary, MNCs are likely to improve the usual local wages, and accordingly ameliorate the income of employees in developing nations. Moreover, proponents of MNCs argue that it is not likely that multinationals violate local laws, for usually regulations in developing countries are not notably demanding (37]). Finally, it is found that workers in MNCs are less likely to lose their jobs in comparison to employees of local firms [38].

Harming women

Multinationals play an important role in the employment of young women in developing countries, especially in free trade and export processing zones. It is highly criticised that most of these jobs are underpaid and predominantly low-skilled, and contribute to the reinforcement of gender stereotypes confirming the low status of women in the Third World [39]. MNCs are accused of taking advantage of married women with low aspiration wages [40]. Women employed in developing countries have none or little labour protection, and the fact that subcontractors are increasingly used by foreign MNCs weakens employee rights even more [41]. According to a 2002 Oxfam report, unregulated MNCs contribute to poverty and extreme forms of female workers exploitation, exposing them to the worst excesses [42].

According to Bhagwati however, most of the evidence proves the contrary. In Bangladesh for example, it was observed that unmarried women working in factories felt proud in their earnings and their consequently greater dress standard, and were able to develop an identity besides being a wife or a child, enabling self-respect, autonomy and freedom from gender work in accordance with local traditions [43]. Furthermore, increased female workforce in foreign firms raises the income-generating alternatives for women [44]. Moreover, opportunities of employment are provided to women who before had little levels of contribution to economic activity due to local traditions and discrimination [45].

Cultural identity – undermined and reinforced

The exchange of cultures resulting from the interaction between people of different cultures is a further result of globalization [46]. Mass media, such as television, radio, cinema and the press, have played an essential role in constructing national cultures and therefore influencing and shaping collective consciousness and cultural identities [47]. Cultural identity is defined as the “cultural values, lifestyles, practices, images and other characteristics of a group or groups with which persons associate or affiliate themselves.”[48] People with similar cultural identities adopt resembling consumption patterns regarding particular goods, in order to reinforce their sense of belonging to a specific group of people and enabling social exchange [49]. As people are exposed to different values of foreign cultures, it is debated whether the diversity of culture is reduced due to the global influence of Western cultures, resulting in a displacement of local cultures, loss of identity and cultural homogenization [50].

Nowadays, multinationals and their marketing activities are increasingly made responsible for their important role as change agents in the diffusion of global culture. MNCs play a significant part in controlling cultural norms and values and the process by which these are transmitted through modern technologies by powerful societies. Corporations dominating the culture of consumerism, such as Coca-Cola, Sony, McDonalds and IBM, are considered “the primary vehicles of cultural imperialism” [51]. Cultural Imperialism is the “critical notion that the diffusion of modern cultural artifacts, images, and styles around the world is a contemporary form of cultural oppression,” [52] which favours the interests of global superpowers. Advertising images and brand names “can be now found all around the world, conjuring the same and similar meaning and experiences”[53]. Hence, observers fear that many cultures from the Third World are endangered for they are being overtaken by other, more powerful cultures [54] Supporters of the idea of global cultural homogenization consider the standardization and convergence of worldwide marketed goods, as evidence for the existence of one global culture [55]. The American beauty products company Avon provided in 1994 one of the “most aggressive efforts to universalize the consumer culture.” [56] Illiterate aged women living on a daily income of US$3 in rural villages of the Brazilian Amazon basin were targeted as new customers by Avon and motivated to buy a US$40 skin-renewal product, in order to feel more beautiful and younger. The company was aware that women would do almost everything, including stopping buying things likes shoes and clothes, in order to be able to purchase a product seen on national television [57]

Critics of globalization argue that MNCs employ mass media to reinforce their cultural domination [58] MNCs have the power of influencing the media messages by either directly controlling or owning vast communication networks,[59] or by saturating the media space of the less powerful nations [60]. Marketing activities, particularly advertising, are criticized for preoccupying “society with material concerns, seeing commercially available goods or services as the path to happiness and the solution to virtually all problems and needs.”[61] By controlling the media, MNCs can intervene in the consumption processes, which are culturally oriented. According to Belk, cultural imperialism and consumerism can not be disentangled. Consumerism is the “ideology of acquisition of goods, which in turn signifies the powers of the consumer to acquire and dispose of goods.”[62] Multinationals empower consumers in the marketplace and deliver them products. However, this empowerment is often only an illusion, for many products are often not affordable for consumers in developed countries [63]. Ger and Belk point out, that increasing expectations and desires of less affluent consumers have negative effects, such as stress, frustration, materialism, class polarization and social inequality, among others [64]. The Turkish society for example was affected by the depreciation of the domestic culture, caused by the imitation of the foreign Western culture, regarding food, architecture, furniture and fashion. The result was alienation and loss of Turkish identity. This particularly affected the younger generation, creating confusion, frustration, lack of self-confidence and helplessness [65].

On the other hand, opponents of the cultural homogenization theory, such as Smith, argue that the emergence of a global culture is practically impossible [66]. A global culture is unlikely to arise, for culture is not transferred in a unilinear way. Flows of culture between different parts of the world always involve some sort of adaptation and interpretation, for the domestic culture brings its own cultural resources into effect [67]. Local cultural groups not merely imitate foreign cultural groups, but create hybrid forms of culture, by culturally and socially adapting the new cultural representations to the local context [68]. Furthermore, it is noted that superficial similarities between culturally influenced consumption trends may hide significant cultural differences [69]. In addition, it is observed that cultures do not stand still, for they are evolving continuously [70] Cateora and Graham note that “culture is dynamic in nature; it is a living process.”[71] Lull concludes that the worldwide circulation of cultural styles and images driven by the activities of multinationals and the global media increases cultural diversity, reduces homogeneity and stimulates creativity [72]. Furthermore, Firat states that there is an increasing tendency to identify and respect differences between cultures, allowing them to exist in their own way [73].

It is observed that because of increased availability of global media and advertising, people in developing countries aspire foreign products and have experienced an increase in consumption expectations [74] In an article by Ger it is suggested that consumption can be positive, for it “can be liberating and empowering by creatively affirming identity.”[75] Social relations can be strengthened by consumption activities comprising the sharing of experiences. Furthermore, consumption has the power to delight and please consumers, and to enrich their lives [76] The consumption of global cultural goods has the potential to improve the lives of people living in emerging nations, by boosting national economies, delivering stimuli for people to work and be productive, improving infrastructure and creating more enjoyable living standards [77].

Economic viability – threatened and strengthened

Globalization can have effects on the relations of power between the nation state, corporations and civil society. MNCs, as central participants of a free market economy, are held responsible for weakening the sovereignty of developing nations, by compromising it to satisfy multinational organizations’ demands. The high dependability of threshold countries from MNCs makes governments compete against each other by creating an attractive investment climate, by introducing special tax concessions and not strict pollution laws at the sacrifice of indigenous people and the environment [78]. Hence, it is possible that the increment of the welfare that would result from the investments of multinationals will be diminished or even eliminated [79].

Critics of globalization argue that great levels of foreign ownership by MNCs can lead to financial and technological dependence, for multinationals are often the only or major diffuser and importers of technology and capital. Moreover, MNCs are accused of contributing to an outflow of profits, which could have been captured in the emerging countries, if the development of national potentials would have been encouraged. The flexibility of MNCs regarding sourcing, are a further point of criticism. Multinationals, as opposed to local firms, can unexpectedly cease their operations in one developing nation, and relocate their operations in a different country. Additionally, foreign dependability may lead to locking emerging nations into low-productivity and low skilled activities [80] Further criticism is the reduction of innovativeness in developing countries, caused by following the demand of consumers for foreign Western-like products. This imitative behaviour of local firms may lead to a reduction of potential and positioning on the long-run, and may menace the domestic economy [81]. Moreover, research has shown that in developing nations little or no proof of spillovers from MNCs to domestic corporations operating in the same sector has been identified [82]. Also, the existence of small domestic firms might me threatened, as well as domestic entrepreneurship might be hindered or destroyed when large MNCs enter the local market [83]. Local companies in developing nations might not be able to compete against multinationals, for they are not able to undertake short term losses and do not dispose of large budgets for heavy advertising expenditures [84]. Gwynne also observes that in Latin America, despite the increased presence of MNCs, there has been scarce technological diffusion [85]. In addition, the prices of Western products have the tendency to be notably higher than the average prices of the mass-market [86]. An example of oppression and recklessness of a MNC in a developing market, is the Spanish telecommunication company Telefónica in Peru. Telefónica made everything possible to prevent competition to enter the Peruvian telecommunication market, by using its monopolistic power and OSIPTEL [87], the telecommunication regulatory body of Peru. Furthermore it is noted, that since Telefónica took over the Peruvian telecommunication market, the prices for communication services are extremely high, hindering local consumers to pay their telephone bill [88].

Supporters of globalization note that the last years have brought along a shift in the distribution of power between developed and developing nations. Economic power is shifting towards rapidly growing developing nations with great economic potential, away from the developed world [89]. These supporters agree that multinationals have the potential to transfer knowledge and technologies, promoting economic growth in less developed countries [90]. In Ghana, it was observed that spillovers take place through the movement of skilled staff from MNCs to national companies [91] Additionally, MNCs serve as role models to domestic firms, increasing the number of local companies and developing local entrepreneurship and talent. This is especially notable in the relationship multinationals have with their suppliers. MNCs can provide support to domestic companies by training their staff, and assisting them in product quality and sourcing questions [92]. In Mexico for example, Wal-Mart maintained a solid relationship with their local suppliers, supporting their growth and expansion. Another pro-multinationals argument is that these corporations invest more money on promotions than most of local competitors, and pay higher salaries to their employees [93] Moreover, it is noted that MNCs may contribute to an increase of market competition, which may lead to better quality and larger variety of products, and hence conduce to increased consumer welfare. Besides possible capital inflows, which raise domestic supplies of capital, MNCs may contribute to an augmentation of the domestic labour productivity. The raise in productivity is estimated at between 30 and 70 percent in comparison to local companies [94]

Finally, Bhagwati concludes that “just because lower standards exist in the poor countries, it does not mean that multinationals will take advantage of them.”[95] Large MNCs are not in the position of deteriorating their reputation by causing intentional harm to the people and the economies of less developed countries. With the global media and non-governmental organizations everywhere, it has becomes harder for MNCs to behave unmorally, even though their actions are in accordance with local regulations.

Conclusion

The above presented arguments and examples illustrate that MNCs can have both, positive as well as negative effects on emerging countries, their societies, their domestic culture and their national economies. MNCs are accused of contributing to poverty, child labour, increased harm to women, workers exploitation, and violation of labour laws as well as human rights in less developed nations. However, large foreign corporations are able to deliver benefits to local communities, by stimulating economic growth throughout targeting poor consumers, offering decent employment in formal sectors of the economy to women and children, and offering higher income and increased job security than local firms.

The marketing activities of multinationals may undermine the domestic culture of the developing host country, leading to identity loss and alienation among the population. But simultaneously, the emergence of one homogenous global culture is considered improbable, for elements of the local culture will always remain present and shape the cultural symbols, images and values of the prevailing indigenous culture. The increasing and highly criticized consumption culture in emerging nations, boosted by large multinationals in the Third World, may create on the one hand frustration and materialism, but at the same time on the other hand contribute to consumer empowerment and identity affirmation among cultural groups.

Globalization and consequently the practices of MNCs may lead to a dependency of less developed countries on foreign investments and technological knowhow, and a destruction of local entrepreneurship and small domestic companies. Furthermore, competition can be hindered and customers may be confronted with higher prices. Nevertheless multinationals are capable of transferring technological and managerial knowledge to local employees, and hence contribute to local talent and entrepreneurship. The increased market competition, resulting from the entering of MNCs into the host countries markets, may benefit the consumers by leading to an amelioration of product quality and variety. Labour productivity can also be enhanced considerably. Additionally, the performance of local suppliers, which are supported by experienced MNCs regarding sourcing and quality decisions, may be improved.

The extent to which these effects are beneficial or harmful to the local communities of emerging nations will probably depend on a numerous of particular factors, such as local history and culture, as well as the governing local authorities, the degree of dependency of FDI, amongst others. As these factors differ greatly across the world each situation in which the marketing activities of MNCs somehow affect the society, culture or the economy of a developing nation has to be analyzed and assessed independently, and generalisations should be treated with caution and scepticism.

Photos:
I) Mercy by Hermes Singson
II) Child by Azil Jamil
III) Working Woman by Robin Thom

[1] Kiefer Lee and Steve Carter, Global marketing management: changes, challenges and new strategies, Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, 2005, p 137
[2] K. Anderson, Globalization, the World Trade Organization and Development Strategies of Poor Countries, 2000, p.9-10, In: Local dynamics in an era of globalization : 21st century catalysts for development, edited by Shahid Yusuf, Weiping Wu and Simon Evenett, New York, published for the World Bank, Oxford University Press, 2000
[3] Jagdish Bhagwati, In defence of globalization, New York, Oxford University Press, 2004, p.6
[4] John D. Daniels et al., International business: environment and operations, 11th ed., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2007, p.21
[5] John D. Daniels et al., International business: environment and operations, 11th ed., Upper Saddle River, New Jersey, 2007, p.21
[6] Kiefer Lee and Steve Carter, Global marketing management: changes, challenges and new strategies, Oxford, New York, Oxford University Press, 2005, p 131
[7] Masaaki Kotabe and Kristiaan Helsen, Global Marketing Management, 3rd edition, New York, Chichester, Wiley, 2004, p. 55
[8] Daniels et al., International business, p.156
[9] Lisa Calvano, Multinational Corporations and Local Communities: A Critical Analysis of Conflict, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 82, pp. 793-805, 2008, pp. 793-794
[10] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 137
[11] Simon Anholt, Brand New Justice: How branding places and products can help the third world, revised edition, Oxford, Burlington, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005, p.7
[12] Güliz Ger, The Positive and Negative Effects of Marketing on Socioeconomic Development: the Turkish Case, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol.15, pp. 229-254, 1992, p.229
[13] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 132
[14] Rusdy Hartungi, Could developing countries take the benefit of globalization?, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol.33, No.11, pp.728-743, 2006, p.728
[15] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 129
[16] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.6
[17] Ibid., p.6
[18] Ibid., p.68
[19] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 147
[20] Russell Belk, Nikhilesh Dholakia and Alladi Venkatesh, Consumption and marketing, macro dimensions, Ohio, South-Western college Publishing, 1996, p.288
[21] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 147
[22] C.K. Prahalad and Allen Hammond, Serving the World’s Poor, Profitably, Harvard Business Review, pp.48-57, September 2002, p. 48
[23] Prahalad and Hammond, Serving the World’s Poor, Profitably, p. 48
[24] Ibid., p. 50-51
[25] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.68
[26] Ibid., p.68
[27] Daniels et al., International business, p.186
[28] Ibid., p.188
[29] Daniels et al., International business, p.188
[30] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.170-171
[31] Hartungi, Could developing countries take the benefit of globalization?, p. 732
[32] Robert Gwynne and Cristóbal Kay, Latin America Transformed, Globalization and Modernity, London, Arnold Publication, 1999, p. 22
[33] Tribunal Permanente de los Pueblos, Sesión sobre empresas transnacionales y derechos de los pueblos en Colombia, 2006-2008, Primera audiencia Bogotá 1 y 2 de abril de 2006, Dictamen del Jurado, http://www.dhcolombia.info/IMG/Dictamen_ttp.pdf , accessed 05.01.
[34] Geoffrey Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, New York, Oxford University Press, 2005, p. 268
[35] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.172
[36] G. Barba Navaretti, and A.J. Venables, with F. Barry, Multinational firms in the world economy, New Jersey, Princeton University Press, 2004. p. 44
[37] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.173
[38] Navaretti, and Venables, with F. Barry, Multinational firms in the world economy, p. 45
[39] Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, p. 268-269
[40] Gwynne and Kay, Latin America Transformed, Globalization and Modernity, p. 262
[41] Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, p. 268-269
[42] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.81
[43] Ibid., p.85
[44] Gwynne and Kay, Latin America Transformed, p. 262
[45] Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, p. 269
[46] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 134
[47] P. Schlesinger, Mass Media and Cultural Identity, in: N. Smelser and P.B. Baltes (eds.), International Encyclopedia of Social & Behavioural Sciences, p.9341
[48] James Lull, Media, communication, culture: a global approach, 2nd ed., Cambridge, Oxford, Polity Press, 1999, p. 283
[49] Jacques Olivier, Mathias Thoenig and Thierry Verdier, Globalization and the dynamics of cultural identity, Journal of International Economics, Vol.76, 2008, p. 357
[50] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 135-137
[51] Belk, Dholakia and Venkatesh, Consumption and marketing, macro dimensions, p.300-302
[52] Lull, Media, communication, culture: a global approach, p. 284
[53] A. Fuat Firat, Consumer Culture or Culture Consumed, in: Janeen Arnold Costa and Gary J. Bamossy, Marketing in a multicultural world: Ethnicity, nationalism and cultural identity, Thousand Oaks, Sage Publications 1995, p.114
[54] Firat, Consumer Culture or Culture Consumed, p.114
[55] Tomlinson, John, Globalization and culture, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2006, p.83
[56] David C. Korten, When corporations rule the world, 2nd edition, Connecticut, Kumarian Press, 2001, p. 156
[57] Korten, When corporations rule the world, p. 156-157
[58] Lull, Media, communication, culture: a global approach, p. 225
[59] Belk, Dholakia and Venkatesh, Consumption and marketing, macro dimensions, p.303
[60] Mike Featherstone, Global Culture: nationalism, globalization and modernity: a theory, culture & society special issue, London, Sage Publications, 1999, p. 10
[61] Richard W. Pollay, The Distorted Mirror: Reflections on the Unintended Consequences of Advertising, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 50, April 1986, p.21
[62] Belk, Dholakia and Venkatesh, Consumption and marketing, macro dimensions, p.302
[63] Ibid., p.302
[64] Güliz Ger and Russell Belk, I’d Like to Buy the World a Coke: Consumptionscapes of the “Less Affluent World”, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol.19, pp.271-304, 1996, p. 271
[65] Güliz Ger, The positive and Negative Effects of Marketing on socioeconomic Development: The Turkish Case, Journal of Consumer Policy, Vol. 15, pp.229-254, 1992, p. 229
[66] Anthony D. Smith, Towards a Global Culture?, in: Featherstone, Mike, Global Culture: nationalism, globalization and modernity: a theory, culture & society special issue, London, Sage Publications, 1999, p 171
[67] John Tomlinson, Globalization and culture, Cambridge, Polity Press, 2006, p.84
[68] Lull, Media, communication, culture: a global approach, p. 230
[69] Alladi Venkatesch, Ethnoconsumerism: A New Paradigm to Study Cultural and Cross-Cultural Consumer Behaviour, in: Arnold Costa and Bamossy, Marketing in a multicultural world: Ethnicity, nationalism and cultural identity, p.42
[70] Venkatesch, Ethnoconsumerism: A New Paradigm to Study Cultural and Cross-Cultural Consumer Behaviour, p.42
[71] Philip R. Cateora and John L. Graham, International marketing, 12th ed., Boston, McGraw-Hill/Irwin, 2005, p. 115
[72] Lull, Media, communication, culture: a global approach, p. 232
[73] Firat, Consumer Culture or Culture Consumed, p.114
[74] Güliz Ger, Human Development and Humane Consumption: Well-Being Beyond the “Good Life”, Journal of Public Policy and Marketing, Vol.16 (1), pp.110-125, 1997, p.111
[75] Ibid., p.111
[76] Ibid., p.112
[77] Ger and Belk, I’d Like to Buy the World a Coke: Consumptionscapes of the “Less Affluent World”, p.282
[78] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 133
[79] Virpi Havila, Mats Forsgren and Håkan Håkansson, Critical perspectives on internationalisation, Oxford, Elsevir Science Ltd., 2002, p.36
[80] Gwynne and Kay, Latin America Transformed, Globalization and Modernity, p.141
[81] Ger, The Positive and Negative Effects of Marketing on Socioeconomic Development: the Turkish Case, p.242
[82] Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, p. 273
[83] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.181
[84] Ger, The Positive and Negative Effects of Marketing on Socioeconomic Development: the Turkish Case, p.242
[85] Gwynne and Kay, Latin America Transformed, Globalization and Modernity, p.7
[86] Rajeev Batra, Marketing issues in transnational economies, Massachusetts, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999, p.15
[87] OSIPTEL: Organismo Supervisor de la Inversión Privada en Telecomunicaciones
[88] Mireira Parera, Nuevas formas de colonización española en el Perú, Observatorio de transnacionales, Cusco, Ediciones “La Hormiga”, 2003
[89] Lee and Carter, Global marketing management, p. 132
[90] Jones, Multinationals and global capitalism, p. 265
[91] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.181
[92] Navaretti and Venables, with F. Barry, Multinational firms in the world economy, p. 16
[93] John D. Daniels et al., International business: environment and operations, p.171
[94] Navaretti and Venables, with F. Barry, Multinational firms in the world economy, p.41-43
[95] Bhagwati, In defense of globalization, p.130