With the rise in energy prices taking its toll on the people, this essay looks at whether solar energy is a viable alternative for the Singapore society. In my opinion, it is not feasible for the average Singaporean as of yet, due to the high upfront cost. However, in the long run, it reduces energy costs, not a bad idea at all.

Solar energy is a form of renewable energy, referring to energy that will not be depleted because of our use for them. It will help in the reduction of green house gas emission and reliance on fossil fuels.  Solar energy converts energy from the sun into pollution free sources of heat, lighting and electricity. Many people still believe that solar energy is a weak energy that can hardly be used the way our current energy sources are being used. However, the research put into solar energy has made it more advanced than ever, and researchers are still developing more ways to develop it, store it, and generate electricity from it.

According to Mr Christophe Inglin at the Singapore Solar Challenge Seminar, using solar energy in a bigger way, coupled with the use of energy-efficient appliances at home, could halve power bills. This idea is tempting. However, although solar energy is free, installing such a system requires large amounts of capital – a big upfront cost. A 1 sq m solar panel capable of generating 100 to 140W of power now costs between $750 and $1,100, with the cost depending on how it is installed. (Cheam, 2007) Prices are expected to fall further, a good sign for many Singaporeans. However for now, solar energy is only for the higher strata of the Singaporean society who can afford it, and are environmentally conscious.

Hence, we currently only see solar panels on the roof tops of certain private houses, few and far between. – A result of their high installation costs, and a possible lack of environmental consciousness among the people. The good news is that private developers are starting to incorporate ‘solar powered eco-roofs’ in some of their new residential and commercial projects.

In fact, the government is trying to bring solar energy closer to the average Singaporean. The HDB started marketing and selling the new eco-friendly project, Treelodge@Punggol in March 2007. (Kolesnikov-Jessop , 2007) These blocks have corridor lights powered by solar panels. They include 3-5 room apartments, with a 15% premium above other HDB projects in the same area. Despite this, the response for this new HDB project is very good. Hence, there could be increasing awareness in society, along with people willing to pay more, because of the long term energy saving cost they can enjoy. This new development is a good sign, showing that solar energy is slowly being brought to the masses and can become a feasible major source of energy in time to come.

In conclusion, I believe solar energy can be a viable alternative energy source for the Singaporean society. Currently it is not available to the masses, due to their high installation and upfront costs. People also do not see the need for the switch. As the prices fall and people become more aware, solar energy may just become the major source of energy for Singapore.

References:

Cheam, Jessica (2007), Solar energy takes a new shine in Singapore, http://www.wildsingapore.com/news/20070506/070606-2.htm

Jessop Kolesnikov, Sonia (2007), Singapore housing agency tries a greener look, http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/05/30/business/bgspore.php

Time for a rooftop revolution? (2008) http://luxuryasiahome.wordpress.com/2008/10/24/time-for-rooftop-revolution/

Solar panels-solar energy, http://www.socpo.org.uk/

The ‘Speech Revolution’ involved the development of speech and language. At present, we are in the midst of another revolution in communication known as the ‘information revolution’ (Jones, 2003) Recent advancements most prevalent are those in telecommunications, wireless communications and the internet. It has revolutionized the way we interact, reducing the amount of face-to-face communication between people. Sending messages via the mobile phone, instant messengers such as msn or electronic mail are slowly replacing the good old telephone. Technology has enabled the communication of our ideas and commands to machines, instead. Technology has sped up the pace of life, making time increasingly scarce. We are less likely to strike conversations with the people living next door, compared to the past. In schools, we are able to attend ‘e-tutorials’, allowing us to communicate and learn without even having to go to the classroom, with NTU just one such example. Hence, it could be said that technology is reducing our communication to mere words or emoticons, making our society less human.

Other than areas of communication, we see a heavy reliance on technology to think, with some arguing that it might be replacing human brains in some instances. We no longer have to remember telephone numbers or appointments, being able to record them in our mobile phones for instance. In factories, bottling and assembling are now done by machines. This has brought about large amounts of convenience and efficiency. However, we lose the human touch, and over reliance on technology may in some sense make us less ‘human’.

Moving on to a larger context, technology in the area of warfare is said to make man less feeling. Gone are the days where man use stones and axes as weapons to engage in war. Biological and nuclear weapons, along with sophisticated machinery are able to cause widespread destruction, making it much easier to take a life than ever before. A bomb can be dropped in another country with just the press of a button, even without soldiers going on the battlefield. As a result, people may become desensitized to the atrocities and killings, with the ease and availability of technology for causing destruction.

Technology may also distract us from what is really important in life. With technology, there are many forms of entertainment that are easily accessible. As a result, priorities change. Social circles no longer need to revolve around the local community as the global community becomes increasingly easy to access. In some societies, the place of worship may no longer be the hub of the community as it once was. This may result in a decline in people practicing religion in those places. (Hughes, 2007) Many of our moral codes stem from religion, and it is a large part of being ‘human’.

In this essay, I am only looking at a small scope of the negative effects that technology can have on the society. There are in fact many other negative effects, such as greater social gaps within nations, to list an example. Despite these negative effects, we also cannot discount the fact that technology has brought about numerous benefits. These include greater efficiency, convenience and a raised standard of living in the more developed nations.

In conclusion, there are areas of technology that raised the issue that technology has made us unfeeling and isolated beings, bringing in the point that it has made us less ‘human’. I believe the blame should not be put entirely on technology, but it is the people behind and using these technologies that have resulted in these effects.

References:

Jones, Douglas (2003) Information Technology and Human Development, http://www.ifp.uiuc.edu/~jones/infotech.html

Huges, Ben (2007) Our Lack of Morals: Technology and the Modern World, http://religiousintolerance.suite101.com/article.cfm/our_lack_of_morals

I quote David Rosen, clinical associate professor of pediatrics and communicable diseases at the U-M Health System. “I think that in the public’s view of mental health conditions, many people think depression kills more people because they commit suicide, or that schizophrenia kills people because people who are psychotic sometimes do very dangerous things.”The reality is that eating disorders kill more people than all of the other mental health conditions combined.” (Murray, 2008)

Eating disorders are health problems that affect the population. The two most common eating disorders are anorexia nervosa and bulimia nervosa. People suffering from anorexia nervosa have the desire to be thin, leading to voluntary starvation. Bulimia on the other hand, is a disorder in which the person eats a lot and then eliminates the food by self induced vomiting, laxatives, fasting or excessive exercise. (Murray, 2008) Anorexia and Bulimia can be seen to be largely social diseases of affluence. Hence in this essay, I will examine eating disorders as a result of social influences.

The rise in the number of people suffering from eating disorders is largely a result of the mass media and globalization. Television advertisements and popular shows portray thin people as the ideal form of beauty. To some the pursuit of the ideal beauty becomes an obsession and results in eating disorders such as anorexia and bulimia, with binging and purging becoming daily habits. These people do not realize that if these disorders remain untreated, they may become fatal.

I relate this to socialization and the concept of the ‘looking- glass self’. Young people, especially students, feel the need to belong, and are conscious of what other people think of their physical appearances. This is where the ‘looking-glass self’ comes into play, which is the imagination of how one appears in a particular mind, and the kind of self feeling one has, determined by the attitude. They see themselves reflected in other people’s behaviour towards them. (Cooley, 2001: 293) With the portrayal of popular beauty in the mass media, along with socialization further emphasizing the idea, people feel the need to be thin, which could lead to eating disorders. Young people are easily influenced and are especially susceptible to suffering from eating disorders. However, it is not just limited to middle class or affluent teenage girls as popularly perceived, who appear obsessed with grades, relationships and having the perfect body. Although much fewer in number, males do suffer from eating disorders too. According to the American Journal of Psychiatry, today researchers find that for every four females with anorexia, there is one male, and for every 8-11 females with bulimia, there is one male.

Another reason for eating disorders, for women, is the great pressure to make others pleased by controlling their physical appearances. Women today have to meet the requirements of both professional and traditional roles. Such eating disorders can be seen to be the extreme point of reaction towards such role conflicts. (Moorey, 1991:57)

In more affluent countries, as a result of globalization, there is a large range of food available for choice from all parts of the world. Increased choice, exposure to healthy living and the increased importance apportioned to aesthetics has resulted in dietary choices, which could be fraught with anxiety. Some people may end up being obsessed with eating less fat, or the healthier choice, which might eventually lead to eating disorders.

Eating disorders can arise as a result of multiple reasons, such as when people encounter major life transitions and fear change, feeling a loss of control. Failure at school, work or a traumatic event could also result in eating disorders, which might appear to be an escape from these feelings. They may appear to be largely reasons as a result of the individual. However, I believe these are also a result of social factors that affect the individual, as individuals fear how they appear to society.

As can be seen, eating disorders are largely a result of social influences. Society influences how we think, act and behave. As a result, sometimes people feel a loss of control or the need to be included as a result of societal pressures. This might lead to health problems such as eating disorders.

References:

Cooley, Charles Horton (2001), ‘Looking-Glass Self’ in The Production of Reality, Thousand Oaks, CA: Pine Forge Press.

Moorey, James. (1991). Anorexia and Bulimia, Manchester : Manchester Uni. Press

Murray, Bob (2008) Recent News and Research into Sociology and Social Issues. http://www.upliftprogram.com/h_social_01.html

Immigration has become easier and much more common in parts of the world. Immigrants migrate for several reasons, for example, to escape poverty or to earn a higher income. The underlying cause for immigration is to seek a better life and a higher standard of living, largely in the cities. The trend is moving from a less developed to a more developed country that will have better prospects than their home country.

In fact, a substantial number of present day immigrants are highly skilled in specialized jobs, sought after by the countries they migrate to. This group of immigrants adds to the city’s and country’s technical expertise. This in turn increases the country’s rate of technological and scientific advancement which will further benefit the country in terms of trade.  This might also solve population problems, as countries and cities facing the advent of an aging or declining population have taken advantage of immigration to counterbalance the falling birth rates.

There are problems associated with immigration that cannot be ignored, however. These include racial cultural tensions as a result of differences in culture between the locals and immigrants. The local people might also see immigrants as taking over jobs that were originally theirs.

An increasing number of people move from farms and villages move to live in cities, a phenomenon known as rural urban migration. Many of these people are attracted by the idea of urbanism in the city. In addition, living in cities permits people to take advantage of the opportunities of proximity, diversity and competition. Rural dwellers hence largely move to the cities in search of a better life. This results in an increased pool of cheap labour, which is necessary in cities suffering from a lack of labour in primary and secondary industries. This would help sustain these industries, which would face closure as native city dwellers are encouraged to take up jobs in the tertiary sector. However, there is a high possibility that these rural migrants enter the bottom rungs of the urban occupational structure and suffer inequality in status attainment in the city, creating social problems. [1]

Private cars, fast transportation and a developed aviation industry have resulted in an increased mobility of the people. This, combined with greater availability of income and leisure, has led to the movement of a new group of people, known as ‘city users’. This is a group of people who move to the city to make use of its services, for example shopping, movies, museums and restaurants, to name a few. One example is London’s Heathrow Airport. The London airport system handles a transient population numerically equivalent to entire nations like Italy or the UK, and this population is expected to double in the next few years.[2] A large number is composed of ‘city users’. This group of people contributes to the economy of the cities, by leaving a sizable amount of money in shopping, hotel and restaurant bills.

In conclusion, as a whole, movement of people does benefit cities. The benefits are largely economic, as cities are forced to improve to compete on the global stage. The social problems arising as a result cannot be denied; hence these benefits are largely dependent on the profile of people moving. I believe that economic benefits exceed the drawbacks, coming to the conclusion that movement of people into the cities is largely beneficial.

National identity involves a collective identity unique to the country. When Singapore first gained independence, the problem the government faced was how to forge a national identity based on a common set of norms, beliefs and value, giving the people a shared destiny and sense of belonging.

A year after the Republic was born; they penned the pledge and the promise to build ‘one united people regardless of race, language and religion’. This has been recited by every school child since. The pillars of national constitution were thus created, and along with the pledge, there was the national anthem and state flag. There was a strong focus on the fact that Singapore was multiethnic, with four dominant ethnic groups: Chinese, Malay, Indian and ‘Others. There was denial of internal variety but instead their contrasts were highlighted to create a national identity. This was largely top down, rather than developing citizen’s sensitivity towards cultural diversity. National Day was also emphasized, as a conscious construction of representation. It is a day everyone celebrates being Singaporean, sings national day songs to feel an exceptional sense of belonging and identity.

One of the government’s significant efforts was the introduction of National Service (NS) for all Singaporean males. This is a social institution which involves camaraderie and bonding as they undergo training, and discover commonality among men of different background and race. According to Mindef, NS was to develop into an important Singapore cultural icon, social glue and lifestyle, affecting the way men work, live and play. These were part of the government’s aims to create a common experience and identity for all. Government efforts do not end there. They also include education, with national education for the younger generation to learn the trials and tribulations of this nation state. There is also the bilingual policy which requires students to learn English and their mother tongue, to enable Singaporeans to have a common language of communication, yet uphold Asian values. This is in a bid to create a sense of identity.

However, Singapore’s national identity can be said to be significantly played by the people as well. The people were multiethnic to begin with, a fact which the government played on to achieve a national identity. With social interaction among the people, identities were created. Singlish is one good example which borrows the many languages spoken in Singapore. There is mixing of languages, yet the people still understand each other, creating an identity. Food is also another example, with ‘borrowing’ across ethnic boundaries creating dishes unique to Singapore. There is also the love of chilli among most Singaporeans, creating a sort of identity.

In conclusion, there are identities shaped by both social interaction and policies of the government. However, I believe that Singapore’s national identity is still largely shaped by the government. Identities created by the people are largely cultural and not entirely spontaneous and bottom up.

Chua Beng Huat and Eddie Kuo (1995) ‘The Making of a New Nation: Cultural Construction and National Identity’ pp 101-103
George, Cherian (2000) ‘Beyond the Sapping Debate on Language and Culture’, in Singapore, an Air conditioned nation. pp176-182
Lepoer, Barbara (1989) Singaporean identity,http://countrystudies.us/singapore/19.htm
Mindef, 35 years of national service, http://www.mindef.gov.sg/ns35/pdf/main/35yearsofNS.pdf
Chua Beng Huat and Rajah, Ananda (2003) ‘Food, Ethnicity and Nation’ pp93-117

This set of traditional values came in the form of Confucianism, which the government used to establish an ideological/morality system. This can be seen in the political behaviour of Singaporeans. For example, the absence of democracy is interpreted as a consequence of the Confucianism, and the government’s ‘mandate from heaven’ can only be legitimately overthrown when it transgresses beyond the limits of tolerance and forfeits the mandate to govern. [3] Also as part of Confucianism, the government aims to seek order, but also feels the responsibility of a parent to dutifully guide and protect its citizens. [4] With this emphasis, Confucian Ethics was introduced as a course in moral education in 1982. However, it was phased out in 1990, along with religious knowledge, in fear that it might contribute to inter-religious conflicts.

The government also practices ‘soft authoritarianism’, with its influence on Confucian values that champion a strong but moral state, regarding the needs of society as a whole as significant. This can be seen in the mass media for example, where biased reports against national interests are disallowed. Outright criticism of the government can lead to criminalization. There are also heavy fines for littering, graffiti and strict housing laws. In fact, there are many who attribute Singapore’s economic success to this authoritarianism. Democracy practiced in Singapore is hence different from liberal democracy, as it does not emphasize individual rights to as great an extent. There have been attempts to greater hear the voices of the individual; with the relaxing of rules of the speakers corner for example. However, its effects have yet to be seen.

Despite the controls of the Singapore government, most Singaporeans are satisfied. Political freedom is not important enough to make up for the advantages of the Singaporean system. Living in Singapore, in fact, is equated with having an excellent housing programme, good economic and employment opportunities and an almost crime-free environment. [5] Having been spoon-fed and guided by the government, Singaporeans are content with the status quo. In a recent news interview, a man was asked how he was affected by the milk products contaminated with melamine. He replied that as long as he bought groceries from the larger supermarkets, there should not be a problem as the government would take care of everything. This is just one typical example of how Singaporeans are dependent on their government.

To conclude, Singapore is a democratically elected government with a different form of democracy, practicing soft authoritarianism with Confucian influences. Democracy is a system of governance based on popular vote and participation. In the beginning, economic progress was used to legitimize politics. Singapore has reached a certain stage in development, and I believe public discussion can be made a feature of Singapore’s society.  The will of the public is also required for the society to become more democratic.

In December 1991, the unthinkable happened. The world’s first communist state – the Soviet Union collapsed into 15 constituent republics. [1] The Cold War was a period of East West competition, tension and conflict. [2] It was essentially a conflict between the world’s two major powers – The United States of America (US) and the Soviet Union. They were championing two different ideologies, democracy and communism respectively. The Cold War lasted from 1945 to 1991[3], ending with the collapse of the Soviet Union.  How did this happen?

When Gorbachev became the leader of the Soviet Union, the Soviet economy was already in a bad shape, approximately half the size of the US economy. He came up with 2 main policies, Glastnost and Perestroika. Glastnost was the policy of openness, which promoted the principle of freedom to criticize and reduction of censorship. Perestroika involved the restructuring and reform of the economy. However, these policies were not very successful, and were major contributing factors for the fall of the Soviet Union.                            

As a result of Glastnost, Gorbachev began to lose control of public opinion. Soviet citizens interpreted this openness to include criticisms of Soviet history and its leaders. This eventually led to a hardliner coup as there was a complete loss of mandate and control, thrusting liberals to the forefront of Soviet politics. Another of Gorbachev’s policies involved radical Perestroika, which involved restructuring of the electoral system with radical election laws. This involved the executive presidency where he allowed himself to stand unopposed. He was a leader who preached democracy, but claimed the right to stand above it himself. Hence, this threatened the structure of the Soviet Union.

In the economic sphere, the Soviet economy failed as its pace was too quick and it had competency problems. Gorbachev implemented radical reforms with some degree of flexibility. However, there was no shift to market economy or private enterprise and no retreat from planned economy. His reforms hence had the effect of destroying the rationale of the old system, without putting viable new mechanisms in its place. Communism proved to be a failed system, and Perestroika in its last hope could not save it. These policies by Gorbachev caused the stagnating Soviet system to worsen further.

As a result of Perestroika and Glastnost, and the removal of controls on information and control and the democratization of Soviet life, reform was also spreading to Eastern Europe at a rapid speed. Revolutions started in East Germany with the eventual collapse of the Berlin Wall, in Czechoslovakia which swept the communist party from power, as well as Romania where a bloody revolution was involved. It was Gorbachev’s policies and the power of the people that led to the end of the Cold War in Eastern Europe.

We also cannot discount the fact that Gorbachev implemented new policies such as Perestroika and Glastnost in response to US actions . The US added stress on the Soviet, forcing them to keep up. US President Reagan, built up US military power to attain clear superiority over the Soviet Union, and weakened it further by denying it access to western technology and economic support. This caused the Soviet Union to rethink its commitment and foreign policy. Hence Gorbachev’s policies could be a direct response to the West which forced Soviet to confront its internal weakness and narrowed options open to them.

Therefore, we can say that it was the West who pushed the Soviet to a corner, but it was the policies of Gorbachev that allowed the spread of reform within the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe that brought the Cold War to an end.

Web References:

Gorbachev and the end of the Cold War, Apr 5 2006, http://belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu/publication/1531/gorbachev_and_the_end_of_the_cold_war.html?breadcrumb=%2F

Cold War – Special Reports from CNN.com, 1998, http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/cold.war/

Compassion for a criminal is a sense of mercy and leniency. I believe not all criminals deserve harsh punishment, and we need to show compassion.

Street crime, for example, is usually a result of poverty and inequality. These people feel threatened by unfriendly conditions of the city and are envious of the wealth they see around them. Hence, crime is seen as the only opportunity. Punishing such criminals would not solve the problem of vivid inequality; neither would it serve as a practical deterrence. In this case, compassion should be shown! Similarly, youth violence is also largely a result of huge social and cultural dislocation. Social marginalization and alienation has resulted in youths feeling envious, which can easily lead to violence. They see crime as a way of getting back at society, and to show their existence. It can be said that punishment for these youths is a form of deterrence. However, this does not serve to solve the problem, neither is it seen as deterrence by many of these rebellious youth. I believe compassion could be shown, in the form of lighter punishments, such as counseling or community service, instead of jail terms. This would be beneficial for these easily influenced youth who have the opportunity of setting their paths right again.

Moving on to the handling of more serious crimes, the issue of capital punishment comes to mind. Singapore is known for its stand on capital punishment. It imposes the death penalty for what it considers very serious crimes, those of drug trafficking and murder. I believe some form of compassion can be shown in this issue of capital punishment. Killing a person brings about many ethical issues – is a life for a life justified? Taking a religious stand, who are we to decide who lives and who dies? In some countries, fairness is questioned. People in the death row could be poor, and unable to afford the best defense for their trial. Hence, showing compassion and not imposing the death penalty could prevent the loss of innocent lives.  Life imprisonment as an alternative to capital punishment might allow criminals to change their ways with help. They could contribute to society by doing some form of work within the prison walls, with the small probability of them returning to society again.  

However, I have to agree that misplaced compassion can bring about tyranny. Capital and other forms of harsh punishment do serve as a form of deterrence for some criminals. Having them in place could serve to reduce crime rates. Compassion also should not be shown to mass murderers or premeditated murderers. It is difficult to change people who cheapen the value of life and believe in what they do. A hard-line stance is required.

In conclusion, compassion is required for society to lose its reservations and embrace criminals who want a second chance. Showing no mercy would only serve to perpetuate the cycle of revenge and anger. I must emphasize, however, that this cannot be said for all criminals. Hardcore criminals and mass murderers deserve punishment. Compassion should not be at the expense of putting our lives in danger.

Picture taken from: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Crime.svg

The situations in the two nations are similar. In both, an increasing number of women are pursuing higher education and then using that education in professional jobs. Many of these women also have children at home to look after, and struggle to handle work both at home and in the office. This is where the term ‘supermom’ comes in. In many families, both parents work, creating little time for their children. There is hence a general lack of time for the family.

As a result, many companies have stepped in to provide help, which could also be seen from the documentary. Companies have started providing child care services for children of their employees. With this benefit for staff, a smaller number of women would quit their jobs to look after their children and employees would be better able to focus. This in fact boosts the morale of employees, which in turn improves their performance. This is very much the same in Singapore. Nanyang Technological University (NTU), for example, has a child care centre for faculty and staff members’ children who are between 3 and 6 years old. The centre is currently operated by Learning Vision Pte Ltd and provides full day care at a reasonable price. [1]

Moving on to Singapore in specifics, the changes in population policies instituted by the government do show the changing roles of women and priorities in the family. In 1965, when Singapore was still a new state, the government embarked on the ‘Two is Enough’ policy. The policy consisted of granting a set of material incentives and disincentives in housing allocation, educational opportunities for children, tax and healthcare benefits, accompanied by aggressive publicity campaigns. [2] However, as Singapore became more developed and educational levels rose, family priorities changed as well. Many people, women included, placed more emphasis on careers, choosing to start a family later and have fewer children. There was no longer a widespread preference for larger families. Birth rates took a drastic dip.

With the projection that Singapore might not be able to replace its population, the government abandoned the ‘Two is Enough’ policy and changed it to the current ‘three or more if you can afford it’ policy in 1987. However since then, there have only been very marginal increases in birth rates. The government introduced Baby Bonus Scheme in 2001 in the hope of encouraging families to have more children, by helping to lighten the financial cost of having children. [3] However, unless the values of society change, it is unlikely that there will be a significant increase in birth rates because of the baby bonus scheme.

As we can see, roles and the way Singaporean women think have changed. Not too long ago, less emphasis was given to education for women. There was a kind of division of labour, whereby women were in charge of maintaining the home and nurturing the children, while the men go out to work. With the rapid development of Singapore these last 43 years, young Singaporean women have the opportunity to attain higher education, and many place greater importance on their careers as opposed to starting a family. 

Hence, Singapore now faces the same situation as many of the more developed countries in the world – highly burdened women and a troubling population growth rate.

This topic of work and trade deals with the issue of free trade, international division of labour, and the different international institutions, as mentioned in the lecture. The country very much involved is the United States of America (USA). Since the golden age of capitalism, the US has been willing to take up the leadership role in international negotiations which helped determine the shape of the world’s economic system. Hence I chose to focus my discussion on the role US has been playing in this global world of work and trade!

From the beginning, the US took the initiative in forming the UN and the Bretton Woods institutions to ward off a renewal of economic warfare of the interwar period. These institutions included the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the General Agreements on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) – World Trade Organization (WTO). They believed a more open economy would link the economic activity of other countries into a satellite relationship with the US. The US had several objectives in the Bretton Woods institutions. They wanted to increase US exports by extending monetary loans through the IMF and World Bank, and a worldwide trend towards free trade. The role of the US was in fact more central than expected.

How then did this role affect the developing countries?

The institutions mentioned above were aimed to assist developing countries, but the US taking the leadership role, reaped many benefits too. The World Bank, for example, provided long term loans to countries for individual capital projects. This access to funds could be said to have ‘strings attached’ as it created a backflow to the US, when they imported US exports. However this created niche industries and over specialization in the developing countries. This affected them especially when demand patterns changed and the industries, abandoned.

The US multinational companies (MNCs) have played a major role in the transfer of technology. They were a major instrument through which the US was more closely integrated with other countries, transferring US technology, management and capital. As a result, the industrial world had access to American capital. There was international division of labour, which resulted in an increase in output of the global economy. However this had a negative impact on developing countries. Factories were built in these countries because of their cheap labour. It created over dependency on technology, where the MNCs benefited the most, as they became the new imperialists. They now had the power to dictate economic development.  The developing countries were hence at the losing end. There was dominance of the interests of the big players such as the US as compared to the smaller players, who were ‘under their control’.

The increased integration of the US economy has also presented challenges to the US. The increased foreign competition has resulted in people being forced to adjust or move overseas. Only those able to cope with this competition can reap the benefits.  [1] Some people feel that the free trade policies in the US have resulted in declining wages and a growing income disparity within the US too.

The US has been playing a pivotal role in the global economy, especially in the second half of the 20^th century. This superpower has been willing to take up the leadership role in international negotiations, and other countries recognized the need for US engagement. They had their objectives and reaped the benefits, sometimes at the expense of the less developed countries. However it still was and is an important facilitator, influencing the system of work and trade in the global economy!