PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT
Name of the Student:
Name of the University:
Author note:
Introduction
There have been extensive claims in recent years related to the impacts of economic globalization on internal and domestic politics especially its unconstructive effect on remuneration earners and trade unions. Globalisation has been driven by major forces whereby globalisation of all product and financial markets, advanced technology and deregulation. Walsh (2014) has noted in global economy, power is the capacity of an organisation to direct tangible and intangible assets which establish consumer loyalty. Trade amongst the U.S, U.K and other developed nations via the use of comparative advantage promotes growth and development which is attributed to a strong correlation between the openness to trade and distributions and the impact on financial growth and financial performance. Additionally, one of the significant potential advantages of globalisation is to offer avenues for minimising macro-economic volatility on output, distribution and consumption through diversification. As per reports, globalization in Australia peaked in 2010-2011 in relation to trade increase and further has decreased modestly since then. Gamlen (2014) has noted that Australia’s global employment as a share of GDP is identified as one of the lowest in the OECD nations. Australia is recognized as a well-integrated nation into international capital markets, has positioned in the 17th on the MGI Financial Connectedness Ranking. Reports of Martens et al. (2015) have revealed that foreign investment in Australia and Australian foreign investment overseas is increasingly controlled by portfolio flows at the cost of direct investment. Furthermore, Australia tends to be a comparatively restricted supervisory government for Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) on the basis of the OECD’s extent of FDI restrictiveness. The following paper will analyse the way Australia has been able to maintain its trade, immigration, foreign and labour policy as well as security environment in response to globalisation.
Discussion
Australia has proliferated significantly from its largely internationalist orientation across financial, commercial, social as well as inter‐governmental dimensions. Australia with accurate domestic policy preferences have continued to benefit from being an open economy. According to Obstfeld (2015), the probable benefits for Australians are vast, across a wide-ranging array of profitable, social and cultural performance. The role of Australia in response to globalisation depended on pursuing neo-liberal economic policies as it opened up new avenues during terms of both conservative and Labour administrations. However, case study on social policy responses has revealed that the use of market-oriented policies in addition to the speed of their overview in New Zealand have shown greater degree of hostility in comparison to Australia, as was the way in which social policy has been implemented to strengthen instead of increased inequality and poverty. Authors have stated that Australian social policy reforms in 1990s offered higher degree of social defence and responded more appropriately to a transformed financial and social environment than as per the case of New Zealand. Moreover, in Australia there has been observed a more modest modification to global pressures further exhibiting the greater strength of the organised labour movement in the nation and the delaying upshot of its federal institutions (Andreas, 2011). On the other hand, Australia’s divergent policy responses and policy timing show divergent results for inequality and poverty in comparison to other developed nations. Australia’s lower level of child poverty exhibits a range of factors. For example, Australia show significant increases in financial aid in support of low-income families living in the country, from 60% of the OECD average in 1982 to 140% in 1995, and nearly 165% in 2001.
The re-emergence of China and India into the global economy is the most crucial global economic growth which has the potential to have an impact on the industrial structure and thus demand for talent in Australian financial system over the next 15 years. Obstfeld (2015) has noted that China and India are growing increasingly and must continue to do so which will tend to increase demand for mineral and energy materials of which Australia substantial supply. Case study on terms of trade has revealed that the current five-year centred moving standard of the terms of trade is greater in comparison to the past 140 years. Such an increased level of the terms of trade has significant impact on the Australian real exchange rate, which is at its peak level. However, Australia currently has about 38% above its average over the 27 years since the Australian dollar has lifted in December 1983. Such an elevation has a profound impact on the structure of the traded sector of the Australian financial system. However, Pakulski and Markowski (2014) have noted that if trade remain high it may be result to persistent growth in the mining and construction sectors. While Australia comprised of low applied tariffs currently, it has not been the same previously. Studies of authors have noted that Australian tariffs reflected that few sectors receive high protection as recently. Furthermore, there can be observed a legacy of defence for non-competitive industries and political intervention in the tariff making procedure during the pre- and post-war period. Meanwhile, Australia’s mandatory commitments are advanced and distributed in recent times. Although Australia applied tariffs at near zero in several merchandise, the supreme bound rates range from zero to 55% (Overland, 2016). Such a disparity witnessed in the binding gap between applied and bound rates has been used empirically. For example, Australia eliminated most quotas along with other quantitative import limitations in a procedure recognised as ‘tariffication” as part of its response to globalisation (Obstfeld, 2015).
However, discussions in Australia has attempted to align globalisation to international economic interconnectedness and further de-territorialized commercial pressures. The primary agenda of the Australian government is to improve Australia’s activities as a ‘trading country’ and further to make Australian market highly adaptive as well as develop the nation as a competitive actor in the world financial system. Moreover, in relation to global trade, both Australia and New Zealand has long been dedicated to multilateralism (Ng & Metz, 2015). Such a commitment has remained well-established under the leadership of Howard (Flew & Waisbord, 2015). Reports have claimed that as per the White Papers focus of the government will chiefly depend on multilateral trade liberalisation. Such a factor will make Australia and New Zealand to pursue unlimited trade agreements with the United States and China. According to Pakulski and Markowski (2014), all these states aim to develop Australia’s market as well as global interrelation. Meanwhile, Erixon & Sally (2010) have claimed that such a shift in balance between multilateralism and bilateralism tends to create a certain level of complexity for Australian foreign policy. At this juncture, it is imperative to note that Australian government has accepted global trade and direct markets in their foreign policy. Such an acceptance has been explained by the periodic reliance on Australia on the agricultural sector. According to Scruggs and Lange (2002), the sector will tend to serve as a beneficiary of international global trade liberation. However, as governments aim to improve global interconnectedness on certain levels, they might be pressurised to develop bilateral interconnectedness on other levels rather than focusing on mutual satisfaction. Such a development might be effective for the relationship between Australia and New Zealand and as that between Australia and the United States. Currently, New Zealand desires to maintain its defence and safety policy in addition to financial sides of the bilateral connection with Australia. However, discourses over a potential Trans-Tasman economic union are formalised, which may not be feasible for New Zealand to retain issues vis-à-vis defence and security off the table (Devetak & True, 2006).
On the other hand, different reactions towards globalisation’s security challenges of Australia have not been reducible to material as well as geopolitical determinants but are contingent upon focusing on threat perspectives as well as formations of state recognition. Studies of Walsh (2014) have revealed that since 9/11, threats of global antisocial and terrorism have dominated Australia’s foreign and defence policy objectives. It has been utilized in order to structure Australia’s policy response to an array of issues which include nuclear increase, global poverty and communal movement. Additionally, it has strategically restructured Australia’s connections to international law and the United Nations along with the relations with its regional neighbours and old associates. On the other hand, authors have claimed that at the core of Australia’s insecurity is the fear and apprehension which led states like Iran to connect with anti-social terrorist groups like al-Qaeda which is seen as critical threat echoing the US National Security Strategy.
Collins (2008) in his studies has found that Australian immigration policy must be comprehended within the wider context of globalisation and national political economic concerns. It has been mentioned that post 9/11, threats regarding security have influenced the immigration policy makers with aim to regulate ‘illegal’ migration entry, specifically the ones identified as undocumented immigrants who enter into Australia boundaries through maritime services. On the other side of the discussion, Quiggin (1999) has observed that a global ‘long boom’ has produced continual financial development with robust employment progress especially in the services sector. Unemployment rates are usually seen to be at reduced levels whereas labour deficiencies have developed in the professional, technical and capable segments of labour markets. While, analysing Australia’s position in response to globalisation, the process has been supported by an increase in the extent of departures of Australian residents who have been looking for occupational services in overseas nations as vital part of internationally-mobile labour force. At this juncture, it is important to mention that as globalisation has not unrestricted entry of people at from overseas countries as much as it has opened up investment and trade distributions. Such a process has led greater number of individuals to move internationally either permanently or temporarily. In the view of Devetak and True (2006), such an influx of people has led the country to be notably diverse. These individuals from several nations are regarded as documented immigrants on permanent, transitory or traveller visas or undocumented visitors. However, authors have claimed that several immigrants also in due course leave Australia; their stays are considered to be one stage in a procedure of international labour circulation.
Furthermore, one of the instances of Australia’s maintenance of control and regulation of policies is that majority of immigrant labour growth rely on New York, London and Sydney. This has resulted to calibration of Australia immigration policy to fill identified areas of labour shortage or calls for employment services in addition to the increase in the dimension of skilled consumption in current decades attained through comparative decline of family as well as humanitarian consumption (Pakulski & Markowski, 2014). In addition to this, labour shortages in provincial and rural employment sectors have paved way for initiatives in immigration policy further endeavouring to redirect stable immigrants away from large Australian cities for instance, Sydney and Melbourne.
On the other hand, Czaika and De Haas (2014) have argued that Australian migration process has received substantial attention, regardless of only gradual changes in immigration targets. Daugbjerg and Swinbank (2015) have noted that part of the criticism has been associated to the numbers of immigrants, although majority of controversy has been associated to the formation of the immigrant aperture. Furthermore, certain racialised reactions towards immigrant minorities has resulted to considerable negotiations with other countries whereby the disturbances in the northern suburban region of Paris, the Oldham and Burnley unrests in the United Kingdom along with riots of 1991 in Los Angeles have been cited as most relevant examples. However, studies of Andruseac (2015) have claimed that these types of disturbances have taken place in nations where government regulate closely to the dimensions and structure of the influx of immigrants.
However Australia always effectively controlled its immigration policy determining the numbers and influencing the composition of the immigration consumption. The country give immense importance to education and employment sectors relevant for the new economy. For example Europeans are positioned next to the British immigrants where by United Kingdom has been positioned as the first or second immigrants’ source of Australia annual immigrant consumption (James, 2014). Meanwhile, immigrants particularly from New Zealand are identified as ‘wild card’ in Australian immigration policy regardless of any quota. While on the other hand, it has been revealed that Australian immigration policy like Canada has been facing challenges to establish a well-known monetary rationale. Consequently, the Australian government has purposed to benefit from the supposed financial benefits of immigration to attain greater public support by shifting family reunion to independent immigration intakes. Such a support has been chiefly aimed as majority of public initially showed lack of enthusiasm. Furthermore, in case of increase of immigration, Schrecker (2016) has highlighted and important component Australia as temporary migrants depends on foreign students who have been granted resident visa us in order to complete their academics industrial educational institutions. Thus, the country is recognised as the fourth largest recipient nation in the world in support of foreign students along with the rise in the number of international students in Australia which has experienced a sudden increase in the OECD. Studies of Walsh (2014) have revealed that between 1990 and 2001, the numbers have increased by almost 300%. However while the Australian immigration policy has received several controversies due to various discussions on economic social as well as environmental effects of immigration please discussions have been strictly restricted to the permanent or settler migration programmes.
With the rise of globalisation and labour mobility, high numbers of temporary immigrants expected to be of high importance to Australia. The recent history of Australian immigration sheds light on the ways in which regulated immigration policy aims to accomplish labour market deficiencies generated by a decade and a half of robust financial development along with structural trains in the Australian financial system as an outcome of globalisation (Devetak & True, 2006). Thus, by disregarding the important elements of immigration recent Australian immigrating in regulation and policy has thrown light on the short term financial benefits at the expense of medium to long term social cohesion. even though for a country like Australia comprising of more immigrants belonging to diverse backgrounds in comparison to other Western Nations this can be seen as a considerable threat. However, these strategies show the way Australia has attempted to control its policies in response to the rise of globalisation.
Such an underlying factor suggests that improved centralised collective bargaining has been conducive towards better level of unionization of the workforce. According to Walsh (2014) firstly negotiating centralisation exhibited the organisation of business enterprises and their shared benefits and interest in the maximization of coordination. Furthermore, centralised negotiation has reduced the benefits for employers to remove unions from workplaces as they should lack of inclination to receive major salary benefits. Secondly, negotiating centralisation with potential macro financial advantages such as salary limitation may tend to strengthen the government’s interest in sustaining well-established unions. Moreover, by gaining centralisation may show a propensity to exhibit a commonality of challenges among employees and capital over which to negotiate even if the highest level of the negotiation does not set the final remuneration. answer result centralised interest group or organisation as well as active involvement in policy making in Australia in support of employer union as well as association have been taken into consideration in order to maintain social political as well as economic consistency in majority of organised financial systems during the post war period. Collins (2008) has noted that the web of relations between authorised groups formulated collective independence amongst associations’ unions, organisations and government and thereby institutional arrangements have been beneficial to the continuous urge for strong union organisations. Meanwhile, Australia’s federal response towards globalisation has supported the utilisation of informal political procedures over official institutional structures. Such an approach has facilitated practical accommodations amongst several federal organisations and also allows effective experimentation on alternative courses of action.
Nonetheless, as per the view of Quiggin (1999), the strategy also shows a certain level of responsiveness which has been produced from short term reactions to direct case issues which are typically influenced by narrow interests. Comprehensive studies of Erixon and Sally (2010) have mentioned that unless supported by improved vigilant and explicit analysis of issues highlighted by globalisation’s extensive areas of challenges related to policy expansion by means of individualised case decisions tend to pose uncertainties to the characteristics of more fundamental, enduring impacts on Australia’s federal system. Furthermore, Scruggs and Lange (2002) have noted that Australia’s existing set of preferences have worked upon explaining the characteristics and degree of sub-national government involvement in the process of policy making while external pressures tend to threaten to impose domestic developments in areas of state and territorial benefits. For instance, states as well as territories have not put efforts to attempt intervention to change political situations unlike the United States (Erixon & Sally, 2010).
Conclusion
Hence to conclude, all the expansions and
trends are consistent with the acceptance of globalisation as well as a neo
liberal political purpose by Coalition and Labour federal governments.
Nonetheless, one distinctive direction observed in the Australian immigration policy
emerges from previous Coalition government in particular. This has been
regarded as a strong stance which the Howard government has taken on immigrants
or non-registered immigrants as well as refugees which has led to a Pacific
solution. This approach has constituted a break with the practice of
neo-partisan immigration as well as settlement laws and policies which has
signified Australian immigration history since 1947.
References
Anderson, K., & Strutt, A. (2014). Emerging economies, productivity growth and trade with resource‐rich economies by 2030. Australian Journal of Agricultural and Resource Economics, 58(4), 590-606. doi: 10.1111/1467-8489.12039
Andreas, P. (2011). Illicit globalization: myths, misconceptions, and historical lessons. Political Science Quarterly, 126(3), 403-425. Retrieved from Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/23056952
Andruseac, G. (2015). Economic security–new approaches in the context of globalization. CES Working Papers, 7(2), 232-240. Retrieved from http://www.ceswp.uaic.ro/articles/CESWP2015_VII2.pdf#page=14
Collins, J. (2008). Globalisation, immigration and the second long post-war boom in Australia. Journal of Australian Political Economy. Retrieved from: https://opus.lib.uts.edu.au/bitstream/10453/9940/1/2007004213OK.pdf
Czaika, M., & De Haas, H. (2014). The globalization of migration: Has the world become more migratory?. International Migration Review, 48(2), 283-323. DOI: 10.1111/imre.12095
Daugbjerg, C., & Swinbank, A. (2015). Globalization and new policy concerns: the WTO and the EU’s sustainability criteria for biofuels. Journal of European Public Policy, 22(3), 429-446. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13501763.2014.927520
Devetak, R., & True, J. (2006). Diplomatic divergence in the Antipodes: Globalisation, foreign policy and state identity in Australia and New Zealand. Australian Journal of Political Science, 41(2), 241-256. DOI: 10.1080/10361140600672451
Erixon, F., & Sally, R. (2010). Trade, globalisation and emerging protectionism since the crisis (No. 02/2010). ECIPE working paper. Retrieved from: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/174841/1/ecipe-wp-2010-02.pdf
Flew, T., & Waisbord, S. (2015). The ongoing significance of national media systems in the context of media globalization. Media, Culture & Society, 37(4), 620-636. doi/10.1177/0163443714566903
Gamlen, A. (2014). The new migration-and-development pessimism. Progress in Human Geography, 38(4), 581-597. DOI: 10.1177/0309132513512544
James, P. (2014). Faces of globalization and the borders of states: from asylum seekers to citizens. Citizenship Studies, 18(2), 208-223. , http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13621025.2014.886440
Martens, P., Caselli, M., De Lombaerde, P., Figge, L., & Scholte, J. A. (2015). New directions in globalization indices. Globalizations, 12(2), 217-228. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2014.944336
Ng, E. S., & Metz, I. (2015). Multiculturalism as a strategy for national competitiveness: The case for Canada and Australia. Journal of Business Ethics, 128(2), 253-266. DOI 10.1007/s10551-014-2089-8
Obstfeld, M. (2015). Trilemmas and trade-offs: living with financial globalisation. Bank for International Settlements. 2-59 Retrieved from: https://www.bis.org/publ/work480.pdf
Overland, I. (2016). Energy: The missing link in globalization. Energy Research & Social Science, 14, 122-130. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2016.01.009
Pakulski, J., & Markowski, S. (2014). Globalisation, immigration and multiculturalism–the European and Australian experiences. DOI: 10.1177/1440783314522186
Quiggin, J. (1999). Globalisation, neoliberalism and inequality in Australia. Retrieved from: https://espace.library.uq.edu.au/view/UQ:10951/jq-elr99.htm
Schrecker, T. (2016). Globalization, austerity and health equity politics: taming the inequality machine, and why it matters. Critical Public Health, 26(1), 4-13. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09581596.2014.973019
Scruggs, L., & Lange, P. (2002). Where have all the members gone? Globalization, institutions, and union density. The Journal of Politics, 64(1), 126-153. Retrieved from: https://www.jstor.org/stable/2691668
