Debi S S, It is interesting  and relevant question or assumption. The growth of civilization aims at establishment and protection of civil or welfare society; economic development is one of the approaches to sustainable development of welfare. Open-market and closed/controlled market systems are the approaches to welfare of the society, the goal is one but two approaches. Globalization is the method of liberalization of trade but not to take economy to free market mechanism. It is present experiment to achieve welfare through globalization but already failed to control some economic crisis at the global level. Even USA defending her economy by imposing some restrictions on inflow of goods and services. One again it makes us to think on controlled economy for the sake welfare of the people because people are deciders of fate of democracy and governments.

Arjun, I agree that in a democratic society people decide the mode of governance including the approach to economic  development. But welfare state largely focuses on the needs of those who can not fend for themselves. For example, the university education is now being privatized even in India. That means state is gradually withdrawing from this basic  obligation and focusing on other areas.

Welfare state is definitely in crisis all over. So, it is very relevant as to where the decline of welfare state will stop. If the beneficiaries of the welfare state are in minority then they would not be able to vote against its decline by the state agencies.  For example, the middle class has posed vehement opposition to affordable health care to the poor through state intervention in the USA. 

Economic globalization, in its most recent form, has been limiting the capacity of states to determine their own policy outcomes in three main ways: through trade and economic integration; financial markets; and the competition for employment. Due to the increasing pressure of international competition in trade markets as well as the increased mobility of capital and multi-national corporations, states are incentivized to cut labour costs, to reduce the price of goods and services, reduce taxation to make their domestic market more competitive, and to decrease the size and scope of the welfare state.

http://ftp.iza.org/pp81.pdf

http://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/17/08/2012/end-welfare-state-how-globalization-affecting-state-sovereignty-0

http://cje.oxfordjournals.org/content/28/1/133.short

The welfare state has been put under pressure during the last two decades. On the face of it the picture seems similar, no matter which west-European country you focus on. Viewed as an important institutional change globalisation has been named as one of the main causes of this important policy shift. Inevitable policy adjustments are meant to follow this phenomenon. The freedom of capital and goods to move across national borders is meant to break down the power of national leadership and threaten the autonomy of national policy-making.

http://lex.juris.hokudai.ac.jp/global-g/paper/1-18.pdf

Dear @Debi, welfare states will wither, or its face will change dramatically. Such process is ongoing. For example, in my country free higher education is being reduced a lot. There are many examples of such practice.

Here is another fine resource about the issue that you have raised.

Globalization and the Decline of the Welfare State in Less- Developed Countries by Nita Rudra 

http://courses.arch.vt.edu/courses/wdunaway/gia5524/rudra.pdf

Hello Prof. Debi S. Saini,

Good Day !

I agree with the valuable comments of Dr. Arjun.

I also appreciate for previous answers by Profs. Ljubomir, Krishnan, Subhash.

I also just share one article with attached: "Are Social Safety Nets Protected in Developing Countries at the Age of Globalization?" by Anil Duman

         A number of scholars argue that the welfare state does not necessarily wither away with globalization; however their studies are mostly restricted to developed countries and examine the general level of government spending.

Regards,

http://politicalscience.ceu.edu/sites/politicalscience.ceu.hu/files/attachment/basicpage/59/anilduman.pdf

Globalization should be a consequence of the process of human activities aimed at achieving prosperity for all humanity in the world.

Therefore, globalization when it is intended to prosperity, should be followed by the establishment of justice through an agreement rules and regulations are continually evaluated and refined achieved by coordination and collaboration continually from all sides so as to achieve prosperity for all the people and countries around the world.

Meanwhile, welfare itself actually achieving overall balance (micro and macro), namely the creation of the welfare of citizens and the state can create the structure of the society or the state of a balanced and orderly by providing opportunities for all citizens and the state to build a decent life and they weak getting help from powerful or capable to advance the welfare completely. Not only the welfare of birth but also the spiritual welfare (therefore, must be inwardly and outwardly).

Based on the brief description above, it is a challenge to all of us (all countries) although it is difficult and needs to go through the process, but in the era of globalization is the seriousness and the ability of us (all countries) indeed to realize the overall well-being with full commitment and consistency.

Accordingly, if there is no sincerity and seriousness of all countries with commitment and consistency in realizing the purposes and objectives of globalization itself due to the many interests vested the whole welfare is just utopia.

The phenomena of globalisation has favored the free movement of capital and of production for a global market.  Most of the western multinational and investors have been able to artificially relocated their income in tax heavens and so that for the last 30 years are paying less and less taxes to the western democracies which as a consequences of reduced revenues had to cut their spendings.  The middle classes of a few Asian countries (Japan,China,India, Malaysia, Korea, Vietnam) are benefitted from this globalisation while the middle class of the West have suffered from it.  I do not think that it will be possible in the West to politically maintain this direction for much longer.  Tax evasion or artificial relocalisation of profits in tax heavens will have to be curtailed.  The concentration of capital in the hand of a very few financial actors will have to be reversed.  The destruction of the environement will have to be stopped.  A new world order will needed to be put in place and replaced the international institutions that were put in place under the US domination at the end of the WWII.  The world will have to be governed by a consortium of five or six empires which will negotiate the new world order. The US dollar will ceased to be the world currency.  A new global economic systems will be put in place.

Communism and/or Marxist socialism has and/or have certainly been globally defeated!

Period!

Yes. I think so.

I agree with the spirit of the question; globalization is a corrosive element to the welfare state. But globalization is leading to the atrophy of foreign sovereignty itself. In our milieu, the only thriving entity is the multinational corporation and its backers.

So is the welfare state in atrophy or the state itself? And what becomes of democracy when the state is subordinate to the multinational corporation?

Dear Debi S. Saini. Thank u so much for share your question. I am in full agreement that in some time we miss freedom searching facilities for gain freedom. We loose welfare developping apparatus, techniques, medicins to gain welfare. At all we loose our relatives trying to be updated in technologies that come to us to solve troubles we do not have before our crazy run to get the ultimate technologies. But both creationism and Darwinism evolutionism are in time with our way of life. So globalization brings us with some new diseases includding those technology linked ones but it is inequivocal the gains we had within this troubles. After all we could not wonder decades or even years ago to have the opportunity to share our experiences, our conquests and of course our problems all around the world if we could'nt be in contact or even almost "in touch" without globalization and ist's related access to comunication. So I humbly think that we must to use as better we can this "technology welfares" and at same time we must use knowledgement to avoid chatastrofic interventions in themes like the climate changes, genetic manipulation of diseases and food. And of course we must avoid bad very bad politics as we have in Brazil that estimulates the growth of corruption in pseudosocialism linked to opression and lies... Please believe me we are experiencing in south america a new kind of totalitarism ideologic... Turning people slaves of the Bolivarianismo.

In my naive opinion, I think that the ideal of welfare state is unsustainable irrespective of globalization and would have withered anyway. As the earths carrying capacity is exceeded through overpopulation, resources become more scarce and incentives to find new ways of optimizing resources in a welfare state become harder to provide. Globalization has just put additional constraints to speed the demise.

Dear Debi et all, 

I think that the answers given are very wised. Globalization  could forces states to cut commitments to welfare and are mediated by  domestic politics, by  a geopolitical position  and by a global politics which  influence the first mediator variables. Globalization allows the development of international trade/flows/organisations/ideas.

Have a nice time

Helena

Welfare state is rather "ideal" idea, like a communist. In reality this is almost impossible to realize, .every person/ group first think about his own interest. As the results of "globalization" is a creation of so-called offshores what work against welfare state. I think )and hope) after publication of the "Panama documents" 2 weeks ago the situation may change soon.

Dear Debi:

This is a very relevant question. I see the Welfare State as a policy that distinguished basically the most developed European nations. The competitive pressure posed by emerging economies makes this policy more and more hard to sustain. I don't think Welfare State will disappear, because this wouldn't be good for European productivity, but it is possible that it will be adjusted to the new global conditions. 

A very relevant question indeed. I think yes, globalization puts a lot of pressure on the welfare state model. I think one reason being that for the welfare state to be economically viable, it takes a population with a homogeneous set of values and work ethic. It's a balancing act. The population has to agree on the level of contribution of the members of that society.

Such homogeneous work ethic or values simply don't exist in the global economy. The result is inescapable. If one country is happy to limit worker productivity in the interest of a "greater good," that country will be unable to compete against the economy that doesn't share those values.

One can easily show this, with obvious examples. The welfare state, in which the society generally agrees that workers should have 6 weeks of vacation every year, will experience somewhat higher prices for goods and services (relative to incomes), and a more sluggish economy, than the state that emphasizes maximum productivity. But no problem, the residents may be satisfied with the status quo.

When globalization occurs, the goods and services that were once rather expensive can now be imported from more aggressive economic regimes. Ooops. Now the welfare state cannot sustain itself anymore.

I think that globalization is the "great equalizer." So yes, the speed with which the welfare state is disappearing is fast. But I would say that the trend is not unexpected. And too, in fairly short order, the populations of even the most economically aggressive countries will begin to demand better work-life balance themselves, higher wages, and so on. Look how fast this has happened in China, for example. The great equalizer.

Debi,

Here is a  lucid history of the global economic relations in the world which allows to understand this phenomena of globalisation and its opposition to the welfare states which were created in the  Golden Age of capitalism.

Capitalism and Its Current Crisis

by Prabhat Patnaik

http://monthlyreview.org/2016/01/01/capitalism-and-its-current-crisis/

The welfare state got morphed into a welfare state for the globalized business elite, immune to the usual rules of going bankrupt, and worse, i.e. right now in the USA as an example, corporate welfare has become the norm. It is worse than that, 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/#7f771ed36881

Fact, is that although 19 percent of the USA families do not have a person in them legally in the work force, that what is spent on them is dwarfed by

http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/03/14/where-is-the-outrage-over-corporate-welfare/#7f771ed36881

And the corporate elite has been pushing for such gimmies world wide. This has been the dark side of globalization which no one is willing to accept or to highlight.

Susan L, the social cost-benefit and private cost-benefit are the suitable indicators to measure welfare of state and corporate.

The Decline of the Welfare State, Demography and Globalization

By Assaf Razin and Efraim Sadka

Overview

In The Decline of the Welfare State, Assaf Razin and Efraim Sadka use a political economy framework to analyze the effects of aging populations, migration, and globalization on the deteriorating system of financing welfare state benefits as we know them. Their timely analysis, supported by a unified theoretical framework and empirical findings, demonstrates how the combined forces of demographic change and globalization will make it impossible for the welfare state to maintain itself on its present scale.In much of the developed world, the proportion of the population aged 60 and over is expected to rise dramatically over the coming years -- from 35 percent in 2000 to a projected 66 percent in 2050 in the European Union and from 27 percent to 47 percent in the United States -- which may necessitate higher tax burdens and greater public debt to maintain national pension systems at current levels. Low-skill migration produces additional strains on welfare-state financing because such migrants typically receive benefits that exceed what they pay in taxes. Higher capital taxation, which could potentially be used to finance welfare benefits, is made unlikely by international tax competition brought about by globalization of the capital market. Applying a political economy model and drawing on empirical data from the EU and the United States, the authors draw an unconventional and provocative conclusion from these developments. They argue that the political pressure from both aging and migrant populations indirectly generates political processes that favor trimming rather than expanding the welfare state. The combined pressures of aging, migration, and globalization will shift the balance of political power and generate public support from the majority of the voting population for cutting back traditional welfare state benefits.

I agree with this conclusion

From a Marxist perspective, the post-WWII welfare state was a concession made by the capitalist class in face of the external threat of communism and of the internal pressure exerted by trade unions, social democratic (particularly in Northern countries) and communist (particularly in France and Italy) parties. Also, the post-war economic context of sustained growth and low inflation offered the material basis for such a generous concession in the form of Keynesian welfarism. When this economic model went into crisis and the communist threat started to fade away in the 1970s, the capitalist class started to roll back its concessions through what is commonly known as 'neoliberalism'. For neoliberalism is, in essence, a counter-reform aimed at freeing capital and markets, which entails the dismantle of the welfare state. Indeed, the ongoing economic crisis has forced the capitalist class, in order to keep up the levels of profit, to accelerate this attack on the welfare state in the form of austerity.  

Dear Mushtak, Ahamd, could you please convince the cause or effect relation between aging and ste welfare, aging and democracy-decision, aging and globalization, migration..so on?

The extent to which the welfare state has declined since the onset of globalization in the late 1970s is highly exaggerated in many accounts. The welfare state in the US was always weakly developed, even before the late 1970s. The welfare states in the Nordic countries remain strong even though each of these countries suffered an economic crisis in the 1980s or 1990s. Even in the developing world, social protection expanded in many countries during the commodity boom (2001-2009), especially in countries with left-wind governments. These trends are not surprising. In democracies, voters steadfastly protect the social programs, such as health care, on which they have come to depend. Indeed, social provision is the other side of free trade and open markets. People are unwilling to take on the risks of enhanced global market forces without the social protection that welfare states provide. In short, we should distinguish between the rhetoric of conservative parties - that they favour a small state with fewer entitlement programs - and the reality - that governments making such cuts become highly unpopular. Even in the US, Republicans are very good at cutting taxes, but very poor at cutting expenditures - leading to major deficits that Democratic administrations then have to fix.

Globalization and the Future of Welfare States in the Post-Communist East-Central European Countries!

"How has globalization influenced welfare state development in the post-Communist states? Since 1989 the leading east-central European accession states, Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, have experienced radically different welfare state developments from their neighbors in the former Soviet Union. The first part of this chapter analyzes the "Europe effect" that we find to be the source of this differentiation and argues that globalization has not had a uniform impact on post Communist welfare states. Rather, the effect of globalization differs greatly, depending on a country's position in the international economy and geopolitical relations. We demonstrate that countries closer to the European Union have used welfare state programs to compensate citizens for the traumas of system transition and economic openness. while former Soviet states have allowed their welfare state to collapse to a far greater extent..."

Fine resource!

Grass Roots Government--by All for All.

http://www.modelearth.org/grassgov.html

A community governed by grass root government is governed by a master plan that is perpetually being improved upon by all of the citizens' ideas about what their optimal existence should be like. These ideas are being evaluated on their own merit, not by who inputs these ideas. Everyone is invited to this cooperative effort.

The vetting of ideas being inputted is based on how well these ideas would contribute to the overall harmony of the entire system in the whole span of the spectrum--from a family to the whole world--with all of its human and non-human members alike.

This cooperatively being created master plan governs the society by being authoritative; this quality is caused by the transparency of its creation. Everyone is able to scrutinize every idea being inputted and implemented in the plan. Everyone is being governed by ideas that they control over.

There are no leaders and no followers--only ideas that contribute to the optimal welfare of every single member of the system and to the welfare of the whole system lead.

Thank you, Mr. Jan Hearthstone.

The Eurasist Vision

by Alexander Dugin

https://archive.org/stream/TheEurasistVision#page/n9/mode/2up

Louis Brassard--I am having difficulties getting the link open in a, for me, legible form.

What intelligence, pertinent to the subject, does it contain?

thanks, Hearthstone.

Jan,

Globalisation is not the only option there is for the future.  Dugin rejects this globalisation and proposes an Eurasist vision for the world.  

• Each people and culture has its own intrinsic right to evolve according to its own logic.
• Multi-polarity and resistance to the unipolar globalisation
• Division of the world in a number of autonomous supra-states corresponding to different civilisation type
• subordination of the economy to higher civilisation spiritual values
• spiritual development is the priority of life whose absence cannot be compensate by any economic good

Dear Prof. Saini!

You spotted a significant problem to consider. I take a case -study approach, focusing on COVID-19 and Hunan Resource Mgt.:

1) Contractor, F.J. The world economy will need even more globalization in the post-pandemic 2021 decade. J Int Bus Stud (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41267-020-00394-y Free access: Article The world economy will need even more globalization in the p...

2) Yu, Z., Razzaq, A., Rehman, A. et al. Disruption in global supply chain and socio-economic shocks: a lesson from COVID-19 for sustainable production and consumption. Oper Manag Res (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12063-021-00179-y Free access: Article Disruption in global supply chain and socio-economic shocks:...

3) Hermann Troger (2021). Human Resource Management in a Post COVID-19 World - New Distribution of Power, Individualization, Digitalization and Demographic Developments, Springer International Publishing, Electronic ISBN: 978-3-030-67470-0, Available at:

https://www.springerprofessional.de/en/human-resource-management-in-a-post-covid-19-world/18916526

4) Vlad Vaiman et al. (2021). The shifting boundaries of talent management, Human Resource Management, Special Issue Article, Volume 60, Issue 2, March/April 2021, Available at: Article The shifting boundaries of talent management

Based on the findings above, I conclude that welfare state might decline even further due to future pandemics similar to COVID-19 and new waves of COVID-19.

Yours sincerely, Bulcsu Szekely

The benefits of globalization in terms of economic growth is very promising and has increased trading between nations. whereas, in area of welfare, it is generally seen as being negative.

Globalisation negatively affects the welfare state in a social democratic regime, while it marginally affects the welfare state in liberal and conservative regimes. In the last quarter of the 20th century, welfare states, facing the new global economic environment, have undergone a profound transformation.

Previous answer is the result of plagiarism, copy paste from the following article:

How does economic globalisation affect the welfare state? Focusing on the mediating effect of welfare regimes

Article How Does Economic Globalisation Affect the Welfare State? Fo...

https://www.jstor.org/stable/3078610