Globalization is a phenomenon that is often studied and discussed but is seldom-defined.

It is an ongoing process that possesses different definitions depending on the context and the person talking about it . With this, globalization continues to have different meanings and lacks clarity (Logan, 2002). Moreover, different views and opinions regarding globalization arose . Some scholars such as strong globalizationists look at globalization as a new phenomenon while weak or soft globalizationists look at globalization as an extension or another phase of capitalist expansion and argued that globalization is not new but a recast caused by the rampant development of high technology (Logan, 2002) . Generally, globalization is seen as an increase in the impact on human activities of forces that span national boundaries (Goldin, p. 2). These activities of globalization in fact range from economic, social, political, to cultural, technological and even biological (Goldin, Moreover, these activities are not confined to their own realm but instead, they can interact. A clear example of this interaction would be a biological phenomenon such as HIV/AIDS affecting and being affected by economic, social, cultural, political and technological forces at global, regional, national and community levels (Goldin, 2006) With the end of the twentieth century, the term globalization became an all-purpose catchword in both public and scholarly debate. Some government attributed their economic success to globalization but some blamed it for the widening gap between developing and developed countries . Some considered globalization as the only means by which global poverty can be reduced, but others see it as an important cause of poverty . (Goldin, 2006) There have been many studies that focus on the economic implications of globalization . However, given that globalization is in fact multidimensional and has economic, political, socio-cultural connotation, the objective of this paper is to examine the impact of globalization on the Philippines in three particular aspects, namely, economic, political and social. The first part of the paper will discuss a brief history of globalization in general . The second part will look into the economic impact of globalization, specifically economic or trade liberalization on the Philippines. The third part will focus on the political impact of globalization on Philippines and how its government deal with problems such as transnational crimes. The last part will be a discussion on the social impact of globalization to Philippine society on the aspect of migration and poverty. Brief History of Globalization Globalization is not a new phenomenon . For three decades, the concept of globalization has been rapidly recognized around the world (Bordo, Taylor, & Williamson, 2003, pg.1). Many scholars point to the sixteenth century Europe as the original source of globalization . Others point to the late nineteenth century as a period of intense globalization . With the end of WWII, infrastructure for communication and transportation improved dramatically, connecting countries, groups, peoples in new ways . People now can travel and migrate more easily to other places; satellite broadcasts make world events available to a global audience, internet make communication between different peoples faster and easier. Moreover, there was also an increase in international
1

trade and investment which brings more countries in the global capitalist system. Democracy also became the new global model for governance and international organizations take on new responsibilities in addressing issues of common concern. With globalization, the world is becoming a single place, where different institutions function as parts of one system and where distant peoples share a common understanding of living together on one planet (Lechner, 2004). I. ECONOMIC GLOBALIZATION AND THE PHILIPPINES: IMPACT OF TRADE LIBERALIZATION On the economic aspect, globalization implies increase in integration of product and factor markets across national boundaries . According to the IMF, it is the growing economic interdependence of countries worldwide through the increasing volume and variety of cross-border transactions in goods and services and of international capital flows, and also through the more rapid and widespread diffusion of technology (1997.) Economic globalization is generally characterized by interrelated aspects such as economic or trade liberalization, deregulation, privatization, finance capital investment, labour flexibilization and labour export (Mc Govern, n.d.). Towards the end of the twentieth century, developing countries like the Philippines adopted increasingly liberal strategies of economic development. They opened domestic markets to international trade, gave market forces greater say in the allocation of resources, and privatized many state-owned enterprises (Agosin et.al, n.d.). Given the many aspects of economic globalization, the focus of this paper would be on the economic liberalization aspect. Economic liberalization attempts to create a relatively borderless economy by dismantling controls on the flow of goods, services and capital, allowing less restricted entry of foreign investments (Mc Govern, n .d.). The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) under the WTO enshrined the fundamental principle that export goods should freely enter into the importing country based on the premise that free trade would benefit equally all WTO member countries (Mc Govern, n.d.). In the case of the Philippines, with the advent of economic liberalization, it brought about new opportunities and challenges for the nation state . When the Philippines acceded to World Trade Organization (WTO) in 1995, it demonstrated its determination to face the challenges posed by globalization and at the same time reap the benefits this phenomenon may bring . (Banlaoi, n.d.). For most developing countries, opening their market to the international economy would stimulate growth. With economic liberalization, countries that export are able to grow much faster, especially if they can diversify the products they bring to international markets . With greater export earnings, this would lead to increase in investment and the import of modern technologies to improve productivity (Agosin et.al, n.d.). Technology transfer through the expanding MNCs is also very evident nowadays with the arrival of globalization . The hope that comes with economic liberalization is that as global trade and
2

investments expanded, more and more countries could share the benefits from a growing world economy. However, the impact of trade liberalization is complex . The result of individual country experience with trade liberalisation has been mixed Many studies have been conducted to look at the impact of globalization . However one cannot claim that trade liberalization benefits every country across all sectors and industries because its impact differs across different countries and different sectors. Several studies have made the argument that in theory, trade liberalization should benefit developing countries because of competitive advantage, technology transfer, larger economies of scale, specialization in production but in reality, there are more to consider because of the complexity of the phenomenon. Given the said benefits of trade liberalization, most developing countries including the Philippines have significantly lowered their trade barriers, with average tariff levels down, and tariff dispersion narrowed considerably . In line with their new international obligations as a member of the WTO, the Philippines have dismantled a variety of subsidies and non-tariff barriers to trade (Agosin et.al, n.d.). From the years 1980 to 2000, the Philippines implemented programs of trade liberalization which reduces the overall level of protection. With these programs, average tariffs fell from over 40% to around 8% over these two decades. There were three phases and the first phase was launched with the implementation of the first tariff reform program (TRP I) during 1981-1985, which reduced the maximum tariff from 100 percent to 50 percent and in 1986 and restrictions on more than 900 items between 1981 and 1985 were lifted (Mc Govern, n.d.). The second phase started with the implementation of the TRP II in 1991-1995 with tariff rates clustering around 10 percent, 20 percent and 30 percent. The last phase TRP III was launched in 1996 wherein there was the goal of a uniform tariff rate of 5 percent by 2004(Mc Govern, n.d.). Impact of Economic Liberalization on the Philippines Many studies are conducted to assess the impact of trade liberalization . There are two main sides to this . One side supports the role of trade liberalization in alleviating poverty . This first group sees trade liberalization as having positive impact on poverty alleviation and it is just a matter of magnitude. The second group on the other hand questions this role and concluded that there is unclear relationship between economic liberalization and poverty alleviation. Positive The general assumption supporting trade liberalization is that it improves production and market efficiency, leading to positive net surplus in the world market. This surplus will then in turn induce economic growth and to an extent reduce poverty (Susila et.al., 2008). According to a study made by Anderson, if developing countries want to maximize their benefits from the trade liberalization in the Doha Round, they need to free up their own domestic product and market factors so farmers can take advantage of new market opportunities abroad (2004). Moreover, a World Bank study on the other hand
3

states that 24 developing countries that have increased their integration into the world economy have achieved higher growth in incomes, longer life expectancy, and better schooling . Countries such as China and India have enabled people to take advantage of global markets and thus, increase their share of trade in their GDP, and this was coupled with rising wages and number of people in poverty decline (WB, 2001). In the case of the Philippines, with tariff reduction, it resulted in significant changes in the structure of the Philippine economy . The ratio of its exports and imports to GDP rose sharply . The share of manufactured goods in total exports increased from 25 percent in 1981-1985 to 90 percent in 19962001. This was accompanied by an improvement in indicators of the competitiveness of manufacturing industry, especially export-oriented industries. Moreover, because President Ramos' adopted policies of liberalization, privatization, and reform, it allowed the Philippines to participate in the international economy, which created lots of jobs, and improve the quality of life for Filipinos . With these positive impacts seen during the Ramos administration, the Estrada administration continued with those same progressive policies. Like most other developing countries, The Philippines could not have survived without access to the world market . The country has to export to earn foreign exchange, and the country must attract foreign investment for it to continue to develop (Henderson, 2000). For the Philippine SMEs on the other hand, economic liberalization means doing business across country borders . With the removal of tariffs and quantitative restrictions, local Philippine producers can compete in any country market which means local producers not only look into the Philippines as their market but the world as their market. With easier access to other markets, Filipino consumers can now have a wider variety of products to choose from and at a cheaper price. However, given all these promises and said benefits of economic liberalization such as a wider variety of product at cheaper prices, there are negative impacts to the different local industries such as displacing inefficient and high cost producers and manufacturers who cannot compete and all these affecting employment and labour in the country . The next part of the paper will delve deeper into the negative effects of economic liberalization (Alfonso, 2001). Negative According to the study entitled: The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Labour in the Philippines: A Summary Report, structural adjustment and trade liberalization has generally worked against labour in the Philippines . Rather than provide employment, it has led to the decline of major Philippine industries and the loss of jobs for millions of workers . Pressure of competition from cheaper imports has forced many establishments to retrench, reorganize, downsize or right size, to become competitive . Moreover, the progressive loosening of import restrictions has contributed to the widening of trade deficit by 307% as of 2003 (Mc Govern, n.d.). Import liberalization was justified by the
4

notion that with it, consumers will have multiple choices and with the ensuing competition, it will reduce prices which in turn would benefit consumers . However, as evident in the Philippine experience, flooding the market with imported goods destroys local industries and livelihoods, resulting in increased poverty and unemployment. With the reduced rate of protection for manufacturing, from 44 % to 20% within a period of two decades, it has resulted in bankruptcies of local industries. Locally produced goods suffer from unfair competition from cheap imports. Among the Philippine industries, the severely affected were paper products, textiles, ceramics, rubber products, furniture and fixtures, petrochemicals, beverage, wood, shoes, petroleum oils, clothing accessories, and leather goods (Bello, 2004). Of these, the textile industry suffered the biggest blow: The textile industry shrank from 200 firms in 1970s to less than 10. According to Rosario Bella Guzman, every day for the past four years, eight establishments close down due to economic liberalization, and as a result, 196 workers are being displaced every day (Mc Govern, n .d.). Another industry that was severely hit by trade liberalization is the Philippine agriculture who suffered from the implementation of the WTOs Agreement of Agriculture (AoA) . World trade has increased by 25%; however, Philippine products access to the world market was restricted, resulting in accumulated trade deficits of $5 .2 billion since 1995. Moreover, since the Philippines joined WTO, the agricultural share of the Philippine GDP has been declining to 18% in 2002 from 28% in the pre-WTO regime. Since 1994, when the Philippines signed the WTO, it resulted to the decline in agricultural productivity, coupled by unrestricted imports, which have contributed to the decline in agricultural jobs and destroying farmers livelihood. In the year 2000 alone almost two million jobs were lost . In addition, the less restricted entry of agricultural products creates import dependency for basic needs and ultimately results in food insecurity in the country (del Rosario-Malonzo, 2004). In conclusion, it has been evident that economic liberalization can work both waysto the advantage or disadvantage of a country . With this, the national government has a very important role to play in restructuring national policies to gain the said benefits from globalization . Globalization is a phenomenon that every country is facing and no country can escape it . Historically, it has been proven that countries will not survive by closing down their economies. Thus, national government have to cope with economic globalization and make this phenomenon work to their advantage . However, it is important to note that these opportunities will only be successfully exploited if sufficient capacity is developed by national government to enable a range of actors to engage successfully with the new market conditions brought about by economic globalization. According to Henderson, the reality of globalization must be confronted, and the governments and private sectors of developing countries must adapt if they are not to be left behind . The reality is that globalization is the dominant force in the international economy, and it is not going away. Globalization being the dominant paradigm happens to provide immediate access to economic resources (investment capital), export markets,
5

jobs, and technology. Indeed, these are the very things required for economic and social development. For a country like the Philippines, facing the reality of globalization is inevitable for domestic development (Henderson, 2000) . II. POLITICAL GLOBALIZATION With the advent of Globalization in the late twentieth century, the reigning ideology was free markets and free trade and a decline in state intervention. According to advocates of globalization, reducing international regulations and barriers to trade and investment will increase trade and development because of specialization and comparative advantage of countries. However, it is important to look at the phenomenon of globalization more closely because these very same conditions that promote a globalized environment are the same conditions that made possible the expansion of transnational crimes. The problem is that with globalization, Transnational Criminal Organizations have also flourished (Khan, 2004) . Globalization has made the world a much smaller place to exist in . Opportunities have arisen not only for legitimate commerce and trade but also for illegal commerce and trade and currency movement . With the advent of the internet, communication is simple and at the same time harder for authorities to catch criminals because of encryption, thus crimes flourish . To order illegal weapons or parts for weapons of mass destruction just requires access to a terminal on the net and one will find buyers and sellers with some legitimate others not but the opportunity to carry out this criminal transaction can be on anyones desktop or laptop in any location . The poor can access this as well because the barriers to use are no longer capital cost of equipment because the internet caf makes it very cheap to access the websites whether they are good or bad. Because of all these, there has been a rise in many forms of globalized crime (Shelley, 2006). One of which is drug trade which is the first illegal sector to maximize profits in a globalized world . Huge profits were earned by criminals from dealing drugs, and drug trafficking was used by many terrorist groups as an important source of funding . However, because the market for drugs became more competitive and the international law enforcement responded to this problem, profits were reduced and the risk of trading drugs was enhanced. With this, many criminals and terrorists exploited other forms of crime facilitated by the global economy . International criminals and terrorists have turned into benefiting financially from the increase in arms trafficking and trade of people . These illegal activities has also been coupled with enormous rise in illegal trade in endangered species, hazardous waste, stolen art and antiquities, counterfeiting, and globalized crime connected to credit cards. These organized crimes are usually exploited by terrorists in tandem (Shelley, 2006). In addition, many developing countries were facing the problem of trafficking human beings . Human trafficking remained the third largest organized criminal activity . It was also a gross violation of human rights (Torres, 2009). It has been evident that international crime groups and terrorists have exploited the enormous decline in regulations, the lessened border controls,
6

and with the greater freedom, these groups were able to expand their activities across borders and to new regions of the world . With the increase intensity of globalization, contacts among terrorists and international criminals have become more frequent, and the speed at which they occur has accelerated . Moreover, these transnational crime groups were able to freely exploit the loopholes of national legal system to extend their reach. These international criminals and terrorists travel to regions where they cannot be extradited, operate in countries with ineffective law enforcement, and launder their money in countries with bank secrecy. With this, both criminals and terrorists reap the benefits of globalization, while simultaneously reducing their operational risks by segmenting their operations across different countries (Shelley, 2006) . With these problems at hand, no one country can address these problems of transnational crimes on their own . There has been recognition that there is the need for a clear and effective regional cooperation to combat these crimes especially in the form of information exchange and policy coordination among countries and regions . With this, the ASEAN countries including the Philippines signed the ASEAN Declaration on Transnational Crime . To resolve the conflict of transnational crimes, some of the ways to counter this problem is to establish ASEAN Centre on Transnational Crime (ACOT) which will coordinate regional efforts against transnational crime through intelligence sharing, harmonisation of policies and coordination of operations; Strengthen the commitment of Member Countries to cooperate at the regional level in combating the transnational crime; Encourage networking of the relevant national agencies or organizations in Member Countries dealing with transnational crime to further enhance information exchange and dissemination (ASEAN Declaration). According to Enrique Manalo, the Philippine Government would continue to work with the international community in fighting terrorism . International cooperation is needed to ensure that terrorists no longer took advantage of weaknesses in international law enforcement or judicial cooperation ..Illicit drug abuse and trafficking was a global problem that no single country alone could address. The international community must make collective efforts and share responsibility in addressing the root causes of the problem . In sum, with the threat of transnational criminals and terrorists rising, there is the need for a greater international cooperation, more harmonized legislation, and increased sharing of intelligence. (Shelley, 2006). III. SOCIAL GLOBALIZATION Impact of globalization on Migration in the Philippines This section discusses the social effects, both positive and negative of globalization, focusing on the effects of globalization specifically on the aspect of migration and its impact on poverty in the Philippines. Positive
7

Globalization has made the flow of goods and capital easier as the barriers of entry gradually are now lowered . Globalization has also made it possible for the barriers of movement of people to lower making e the world a smaller place to exist in. Because of these, opportunities have arisen and one of which is the rampant trend in labor export or migration which has become one of the key features of globalization (McGovern, n.d.). According to Mc Govern, labor export is defined as when the state facilitates overseas labor migration for temporary or contractual work (McGovern, n.d. pg. 13).Migration has a great impact especially in the Philippines as it is one of the top migrant sending countries in the world. Labor export is one of the leading industries in the Philippines and has become the biggest source of foreign exchange for the governments debt servicing (McGovern, n..d.). There are a variety of reasons and explanations as of why Filipinos choose to migrate. One of which is the employment opportunities and higher wages they will receive to improve their economic situation . Traditionally, the reasons encouraging an individual to migrate were categorized as push or pull factors however globalization introduced a new set of factors called the network factors which include the free flow of information, improved global communication and faster and lower cost of transportation(Globalization101.org, n.d.). Globalization assisted the free flow of information with the net and its access to information, making social networking easier and advertising for jobs could be found anywhere in the world and application made online . Domestic labor had more opportunities to work abroad. As more Filipinos worked abroad, they were able to communicate this experience inexpensively by talking about it on the net, thus others were attracted to work overseas. Now most Filipinos look for work overseas whether they are unskilled, skilled or professional . Filipino nurses for example can be found in most countries in hospitals. Positively migrant workers provide a very strong boost to the Filipino economy. It has long been thought that the remittances sent back to the country by its overseas workers prop up the faltering economy to such an extent that migrant worker participation is actively encouraged by the national government. Globalization of technology among others has changed the nature of migration in the Philippines as linkages between receiving and sending countries are readily established. Networks connect migrants and nonmigrants (Hefti, 1997). Globalization has impacted all forms of business from finance to human resource recruitment. This has come about with the advent of instant communication both digital, video and data streaming . Globalization also provides intense competition among companies across different countries and among labor supply. Negative However, migration also has its negative connotations . One of which is that migrant workers are often paid poorly and are given low-status work that citizens of the receiving country are happy to pass on as an opportunity to migrant workers who are trying to escape poverty (McGovern, n.d.). Some migrant workers do not enjoy the same privileges and opportunities as the
8

citizens of the receiving country . Migrants are considered as secondary citizens . They face racism and marginalization (McGovern, n .d.). Furthermore, migrant women are more vulnerable to gender related violence like rape, sexual harassment, physical abuse, sex slave trafficking, etc . (Hefti, 1997). Some women migrants expect to move abroad to become domestic workers to support their families financially but find themselves being sold as sex slaves (McGovern, n.d.). Another negative effect of migration is that social life is disrupted by the absence of family members . Furthermore, the economy suffers because of the lack of skilled and qualified workers who are all abroad and anyone entering the workforce thinks first to work overseas . The economy cannot develop progressively because one of its main components the workforce is oriented to working overseas and possibly staying overseas thus robbing the next generation of the opportunity to work under skilled and experienced seniors. Impact of Globalization on Poverty in the Philippines Pervasive poverty is one of the main problems in the Philippines as hundreds of Filipino families are still living below the poverty line . Some argue that globalization cause more poverty in the country and does not reduce it . Their rationale is that not all groups have equal access to the opportunities . For example ethnic groups suffer most and become poorer thus larger gaps are caused between rich and the poor . Urban peoples may have greater access to globalization opportunities than those living in the provinces or the mountains for example. Couple this with a lack of a social safety net and the poor really suffer is the argument. (Banlaoi, 2004). Each country has its own version of poverty and inequality thus generalizations about poverty and inequality are not as applicable as would appear on the surface (Pangestu, 2001). The poverty gap in the Philippines it has been said has increased due to globalization with the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. But this is a general statement that could apply to any country for money begets money if properly handled by the individual . Moving out of poverty is probably the biggest hurdle a human being who is otherwise in sound condition has to face in their lifetime . The Human only has one asset and that is his labor capital to sell [discounting prostitution of course]. Selling that labor capital to get out of poverty is the ultimate dilemma . Does the individual attempt to obtain some form of training and education to increase his labor capital worth or does he place himself on the labor market as is where is and hire out to anyone and anything to obtain an income? Living in poverty it is extremely difficult to increase your capital worth in the form of labor because that requires money so basically the only way to obtain that money is to take on migrant work in a foreign country as a labourer. So for those fortunate enough to be able to lift them out of the poverty trap and find employment overseas without sacrificing future income streams to pay for it, then it is possible that they and their dependents will rise out of poverty. In this manner overseas employment can and does lift people out of
9

poverty however for every unskilled poor labourer the Philippines ahs other countries have millions more who are willing to work for less and live closer to the source of the work. Thus competition even at the very low end of salary for labor is intense as governments enter the fray in an attempt to move their poverty people into gainful employment in another country. Without competition from other poverty fraught nations, the Philippines could exploit this as an avenue to decrease poverty by using this form of employment and assisting the poverty class into gainful employment in another country. However with the reality of having intense competition for these poverty level jobs, poverty is unlikely to decrease in the Philippines using this strategy alone. Poverty is also made worse by the fact that the Philippines relies very heavily on overseas foreign aid to buttress its economy . Unfortunately a lot of this aid in monetary form does not filter down to the poverty levels and ends up in the hands of the corrupt where it does no god at all for low income people. What is needed to help solve the problem of poverty and the growing gap between the rich and poor is for the country to have severe structural reforms in government and institutions and to reinvent the polices such that the environment for growth is substantially improved . This argument is based on the belief that the economy and its success begins and ends with the government and that the Philippine state is weak and immature (Banlaoi, 2004). The philippine government has to formulate a series of medium-term development plans with socioeconomic reform packages . Furthermore, there is a need for institutional reform to sucessfully implement these reform packages IV. CONCLUSION Globalization is not a neutral process (McGovern, n.d.). Developing countries such as the Philippines have to balance the benefits and costs of globalization (Pangestu, 2001). In terms of economic effects of globalization, increasing competition can lead to better distribution and productivity but the benefits are not equally shared because some sectors and regions in the country grow faster than others (Pangestu, 2001). No country can become a level playing field as costs vary from region to region as do local politics and incentives . Regions compete against each other without a thought to the impact on other regions it is basic survival of the fittest. In terms of social effects of globalization, migration has both its advantages and disadvantages as discussed earlier. What is needed is for the government to set up strong institutions and programs that support Filipino migrants and give them a social safety net . Many economists and social planners and politicians from the developed world have looked at the Philippines and arrived at wonderful plans and strategies for improving the economy but none of which have worked. The IMF, World Bank, the USA and the EU to name a few have provided advise and aid to change the economy . According to Pangestu (2001) What is needed in terms of reducing inequality and poverty in developing countries are: sound macroeconomic conditions, good governance, and investment in rural areas to narrow the urban-rural
10

growth gap, flexible labour markets, stronger institutions for provision of social services and greater access to education (Pangestu, 2001). In terms of political globalization, globalization has made it easier for states to converse and form regional groups and associations . However, globalization has brought with it the advent of transnational crimes which cross borders, making it difficult for one country to address . With the threat of transnational criminals and terrorists rising there is the need for a greater international cooperation, more harmonized legislation, and increased sharing of intelligence. The Philippines government cannot address these problems alone and thus, they have to cooperate with other nation in combating these kinds of problems. Indeed globalization can be beneficial but it can also have negative effects on a country, especially on a developing country such as the Philippines . It is now a challenge for the Philippines to continuously evaluate and adjust its policies and programs to respond to the changing world caused by globalization and maximize these benefits while avoiding its downfalls (Goyal, 2006). Long term policies are not adequate as the country also has to respond in short time frames to cope with Globalization. BIBLIOGRAPHY Agosin, D., Bloom, D., Gitli, E. (n.d.) Globalization, liberalization and sustainable human development: analytical perspectives. UNCTAD Occasional Paper Alfonso, O. (2001). Bridging the Gap: Philippine SMEs & Globalization . Philippines : Small Enterprises Research & Dev't Foundation. Anderson, K. (2004). Agricultural Trade Reform and Poverty Reduction in Developing Countries. World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 3396; IIIS Discussion Paper No. 14 ASEAN Declaration on Transnational Crime. (1997) Retrieved on December 19, 2009 from: www.aseansec.org/5640.htm Banlaoi, R. (2004.) Chapter 16: Globalization and Nation-Building in the Philippines: State Predicaments in Managing Society in the Midst of Diversity. In Growth and Governance in Asia. Ed by: Sato, Yoichiro. Asia-Pacific Center for Security Studies. Honolulu, Hawaii.Retrieved from: http://www.apcss.org/Publications/Edited %20Volumes/GrowthGovernance_files/Pub_Growth %20Governance/Pub_GrowthGovernancech16 .pdf . Date Retrieved: December 23, 2009. Bello, W. (2004) The Anti-Development State: The Political Economy of Permanent Crisis in the Philippines. Diliman, Quezon City: University of the Philippines and
11

Bangkok, Thailand: Focus on the Global South. Bordo, A. Taylor, & J. Williamson, Globalization: In Historial Perspective (pp. 227276). London: National Bureau of Economic Research. University of Chicago Press Ltd. Bordo, M., Taylor, A., & Williamson, J. (2003). Introduction. In M. Bordo, A. Taylor, & J. Williamson, Globalization: In Historical Perspective (pp. 1-10). England: The National Bureau of Economic Research.The University of Chicago Press Ltd. Crafts, N., & Venables, A. (2003). Globalization in History: A Geographical Perspective. In M. Bordo, A. Taylor, & J. Williamson, Globalization: In Historical Perspective (pp. 323-416). England: The National Bureau of Economic Research.The University of Chicago Press Ltd. Del Rosario-Malonzo, J (2004) WTO Agriculture Agreement Review Negotiations: Entrenching Unjust Trade, Undermining Food Sovereignty, IBON Facts and Figures, Special Release. Effect of Trade Liberalization and Growth on Poverty and Inequity: Emprical Evidences and Policy Options. (2008) Forum Penelitan Agro Ekonomi Vol 26. Globalization101.org . (n.d.). Retrieved December 28, 2009, from Migration and Globalization. Globalization101.org. A Project of the Carnegie Endowment. the Levin institute. The State University of New York: http://worldroom.tamu.edu/Workshops/Migration06/GlobalMigration/Lesson %20Plans/Globalization%20101%20Migration.pdf Goldin, I. (2006) Globalization for development: trade, finance, aid, migration, and policy. WB: Washington DC. Goyal, K. (2006). Impact of Globalization on Developing Countries( With Special Reference to India). EuroJournals ISSN 1450-2887 Issue No.5. EuroJournals Publishing Inc. , 166-171. Hefti, A. M. (1997). Philippines: Globalization and Migration. Responding to Globalization.European Solidarity Conference on the Philippines. Boldern House, Mannedorf, Zurich, Switzerland . Henderson, C. (2000) Globalization Part 2. Retrieved on December 20, 2009 from: http://www.apmforum.com/columns/orientseas15.htm
12

IMF. (1997). World Economic Outlook: Globalization Opportunities and Challenges. Washington DC IMF Publication Services Khan , M. (2004). Teaching Globalization in the Era of Terrorism . University of Richmond. Lechner, F. (2004). The Globalization Reader. UK: Blackwell Publishing. Lindert, P., & Williamson, J. (2003). Does Globalization Make the World More Unequal. In M. Logan, B. I. (2002). Chapter 1: Introduction: Globalization and Third World Development in the Twenty-First Century. In B. I. Logan, Globalization, the Third World State and Poverty-Alleviation in the Twenty-First Century (pp. 1-14). England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. McGovern, L. L. (n.d.). Neo-Liberal Globalization in the Philippines: Its Impact on Filipino Women and TheirForms of Resistance. Indiana University , 1-27. Menardo, A. (2004) Tariff Reforms in the Philippines. APEC High-level Conference on Structural Reform, Tokyo, Japan. Shelley, L. (2006). The Globalization of Crime and Terrorism. eJournal USA. Pangestu, M. (2001). The Social Impact of Globalisation in Southeast Asia. OECT Development Centre Working Paper No.187(Formerly Technical Paper no.187). Research Programme on: Empowering People to Meet the Challenges of Globalisation , 1-48. The World Bank Development Research Group Trade Electronic Bulletin . (2001). Volume 2, Issue 17, Retrieved on: December 21, 2009 from: http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTTRADERESEARCH/Resources/5448241129916767043/Newsletter_Winter01.pdf The Impact of Trade Liberalization on Labor in the Philippines: A summary report: Too Much Loss for So Little Gain. Retrieved on: December 20, 2009 from: www.saprin.org/philippines/research/phi_trade_sum.pdf Torres, T. (2009). Tighter border protection needed to stem transnational crimes. Inquirer. Yapa, L. (2002). Chapter 2: Globalization and Poverty: From a Poststructural Perspective. In B. I. Logan, Globalization, the Third World State and PovertyAlleviation in the Twenty-First Century (pp. 15-30). England: Ashgate Publishing Ltd.
13